PDA

View Full Version : whats with a 10 ft pole



rokar4life
2009-05-21, 11:08 PM
why do people bring it up so much, whats with it, is there a giant inside joke that i am not part of.

Worira
2009-05-21, 11:09 PM
It's a pole that's ten feet long.

rokar4life
2009-05-21, 11:11 PM
yes, but i can't see why people keep bringing it up

Dacia Brabant
2009-05-21, 11:13 PM
They cost more individually than 10-foot ladders do, so there's that.

Oh and they go well with a halfling tied at one end. Instant trapspringer/decoy.

The_JJ
2009-05-21, 11:17 PM
To clarify:

Easy steps to success by abusing the rules:
Step one: Buy ladder
Step two: Break ladder in two
Step three: Sell the tow halfs as ten foot poles
Step four: Profit
Step five: ???

Starscream
2009-05-21, 11:40 PM
Yeah, the ladder thing is just ridiculous.

In all honesty though, they are just one of those things adventurers always feel the need to buy. They've been a part of the game forever.

You use them to poke around for traps, cross small pits, scratch itches you can't reach, etc.

Due to their ubiquity, many traps now trigger area effects that have a range of ten feet. But don't despair! Our finest gnome engineers are working around the clock, and it's thought that in a year or two the eleven foot pole will be a reality.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-05-21, 11:44 PM
why do people bring it up so much, whats with it, is there a giant inside joke that i am not part of.They're used to poke things. When certain things explode if poked, being 10' back is a good thing. It can also be used to pole a river, balance on a narrow ledge, for a halfling to reach the top shelf, or to make Mr. Keynes cry.


Edit:12 ft collapsable pole, Dungeonscape. For the 10' explosion and the 5ft corridor.

F.H. Zebedee
2009-05-21, 11:47 PM
BTW, is there a telescoping ten foot pole? I can't see my wilderness rogue schlepping a ten foot one around in his light gear, but a two-four foot one that extended would be delightful.

Trizap
2009-05-21, 11:51 PM
you know, you can just take a 10 ft ladder apart, break it into two ten foot poles, tie them together at the ends to make a 20 ft pole and then prod things for traps..........

Zergrusheddie
2009-05-22, 12:04 AM
why do people bring it up so much, whats with it, is there a giant inside joke that i am not part of.

Well, one of the funniest thing is that a ladder is 4 times cheaper than a 10 foot pole. Another reason is that a 10 foot pole is incredibly useful when you just are not sure if you managed to locate a trap.

A stupid 10 foot pole save the entire party when we were in a dungeon. The entire party failed their save to notice that the floor "just didn't looked right." The Rogue was prodding the floor with his trusty 10 foot pole; I actually think he called it Betty. After 1 round, a 30 foot long section of the floor opened up and dropped into a pit full of spikes and some undead. Because of Betty, the party was able to avoid a rather nasty trap. Betty also was used to see how deep a mud pit was and other things like that. Basically, why send your hand if you could send a 10 foot long inanimate stick?

Moose Fisher
2009-05-22, 12:28 AM
10ft pole: Now you can poke at things from a distance!


Quarterstaffs are useful too. Not as long, but you can do lots of damage with a line of peasants and readied actions.

Theodoriph
2009-05-22, 12:29 AM
I always figured Wizards (or TSR) put it in there as a joke because of the expression, "I wouldn't touch that with a ten foot pole".

Some designer in his basement early on probably thought, "Do you know what would be cool...if we had ten foot poles...and people would touch things with them. That would be like totally funny because it goes against the expression. AHAHAHAHA. I'm so funny. Man...I wanna get laid."

Or something of that sort.

chiasaur11
2009-05-22, 12:36 AM
10ft pole: Now you can poke at things from a distance!


Quarterstaffs are useful too. Not as long, but you can do lots of damage with a line of peasants and readied actions.

Plus they're free. You can wish for an infinite amount to drown your foes.

Coidzor
2009-05-22, 01:12 AM
I wonder where that phrase came from originally sometimes...

Theodoriph
2009-05-22, 01:24 AM
I wonder where that phrase came from originally sometimes...

From Wiktionary

"This expression may have been derived by the 10-foot poles that river boatmen used to pole their boats with, along in shallow water, or from the barge poles that bargemen used to fend off wharfs and other boats."

Saph
2009-05-22, 01:37 AM
I've actually used a 16 ft. pole before. The university I went to was on a river, and students went punting a lot. To punt you use a punt pole, i.e. a sixteen-foot-long bit of wood.

So from personal experience I can say that 10-foot (and longer) poles are indeed very good for poking things you don't want to touch (like, say, a riverbed).

They're also great for comedy value when a newbie gets their pole stuck and forgets to let go.

- Saph

Oracle_Hunter
2009-05-22, 02:40 AM
*ahem*

Back in the Early Days, there was no "skill system" to help you detect traps or secret doors; if we were lucky we had Non-Weapon Proficiencies and liked it! The only way to keep yourself from dying when facing the innumerable traps your DM would send at you was your trusty Ten Foot Pole.

Uses for the Ten Foot Pole
- Trigger tripwires and pressure plates while far enough away to avoid whatever it was attached to
- Inspect the floor for pit traps and the dreaded Illusionary Floor *shudder*
- Poke at anything that might be a monster (i.e. everything)
- Push open doors and open treasure chest lids to avoid any darts or gas triggered by opening the thing
- Bind two together with a sheet of canvas and you have a stretcher
- ...and many, many more.

And no, they weren't collapsible - they were friggin' huge! But that's why you had hirelings; they carried around all your pitons, chalk, spare parchment and charcoal, tents, iron rations, and torches so that you weren't too encumbered to kill things.

Kids these days with their skill checks and their point buys and their challenge ratings and their fancy lightning trains *shakes cane*

blalien
2009-05-22, 02:41 AM
They're also useful for tightrope walking.

Kaiyanwang
2009-05-22, 03:51 AM
I always figured Wizards (or TSR) put it in there as a joke because of the expression, "I wouldn't touch that with a ten foot pole".


No jokes. That thing saved lives of PCs for generations.

shadzar
2009-05-22, 04:27 AM
Trap: blahblahblah, anyone near the trap takes XdY damage.

"Squares" were measured in 5' increments (scaled to inches)

Trap in one "square", anyone in the surrounding area (10' radius) would take damage or be effected by the trap.

10-foot pole.

Poke things with it, and be much less likely to take damage from a trap triggered by touching or moving the object because you are more likely to be outside the lethal range of the trap.

IIRC.

Heliomance
2009-05-22, 04:36 AM
10ft pole: Now you can poke at things from a distance!


Quarterstaffs are useful too. Not as long, but you can do lots of damage with a line of peasants and readied actions.

No you can't. It still only does d6 damage with a -4 proficiency penalty on the attack roll.

Ethdred
2009-05-22, 07:13 AM
No you can't. It still only does d6 damage with a -4 proficiency penalty on the attack roll.

Someone, somewhere, point this man at the right thread!!

That's the thing with changing editions. In 1st and 2nd, especially 1st, it was essential to find traps, given the way traps worked in those days. But we had no such thing as readied actions. Whereas in 3rd edition, we no longer actually needed a 10' pole to find traps, due to the wonders of taking 20, but we did have the ability to build a railgun. Don't know what happened in 4th edition though...

Matthew
2009-05-22, 07:25 AM
That's the thing with changing editions. In 1st and 2nd, especially 1st, it was essential to find traps, given the way traps worked in those days. But we had no such thing as readied actions. Whereas in 3rd edition, we no longer actually needed a 10' pole to find traps, due to the wonders of taking 20, but we did have the ability to build a railgun. Don't know what happened in 4th edition though...

Indeed; the abstraction of "taking twenty" in D20/3e means that if you use a "ten foot pole" you might get some sort of circumstance bonus. In AD&D there is no abstraction once you start probing the floor and ceiling with a ten foot pole, it is all direct environment interaction.

shadzar
2009-05-22, 07:50 AM
Indeed; the abstraction of "taking twenty" in D20/3e means that if you use a "ten foot pole" you might get some sort of circumstance bonus. In AD&D there is no abstraction once you start probing the floor and ceiling with a ten foot pole, it is all direct environment interaction.

And poking said floor with the pole that activates the step-on-me trigger to drop said ceiling at a crashing speed, was better than stepping in to the room using yourself to find that the floor has a trigger, or just falls under any substantial weight into a poison tipped punji pit 20' deep infested with rot grubs (http://www.somethingawful.com/d/news/monster-manual-wtf.php).

Meat Shield
2009-05-22, 07:54 AM
*ahem*

<old man rant>

Kids these days with their skill checks and their point buys and their challenge ratings and their fancy lightning trains *shakes cane*

I was about to offer up a grognardian diatribe about kids these days and their not respecting the classics, but I think Oracle handled that just fine for me.

Rapidwhirl
2009-05-22, 11:00 AM
To sum up everyone else, the standard 10 foot pole could be used for many purposes, and if you wanted to survive as an adventurer you really needed one. Miko was sure of it (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0373.html).

When you have been gamer for as long as I have, you will be crazy prepared (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CrazyPrepared). Doesn't everyone sleep with weapons under their beds?

Telonius
2009-05-22, 11:32 AM
BTW, is there a telescoping ten foot pole? I can't see my wilderness rogue schlepping a ten foot one around in his light gear, but a two-four foot one that extended would be delightful.

Well, button 4 on a Rod of Lordly Might (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/rods.htm#lordlyMight) would get it done, although it would be a little silly to get the Rod just for that.

shadzar
2009-05-22, 11:40 AM
Well, button 4 on a Rod of Lordly Might (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/rods.htm#lordlyMight) would get it done, although it would be a little silly to get the Rod just for that.

:smalleek: There is never a silly reason to have a RoLM.

Also the billhook from Aurora's Whole Realms Catalogue can in three parts that would come together to make 15 feet that could reach thatch on the roof to removing burning sections and save your house.

Also Aurora does carry telescoping/collapsing steel poles for 20gp for a set of 6. (pg 137) That would be one pole for each party member.

Tengu_temp
2009-05-22, 11:53 AM
Edit:12 ft collapsable pole, Dungeonscape. For the 10' explosion and the 5ft corridor.

Finally - that's a pole I'd actually take into a dungeon. Walking around with a normal ten foot pole not only is a hindrance, but also looks freakin' stupid.

ZeroNumerous
2009-05-22, 12:02 PM
Finally - that's a pole I'd actually take into a dungeon. Walking around with a normal ten foot pole not only is a hindrance, but also looks freakin' stupid.

You're stumbling through what could be a trap-infested monster-infested dungeon. A ten foot pole making you look stupid is the least of your worries. :smalltongue:

Oracle_Hunter
2009-05-22, 01:44 PM
Finally - that's a pole I'd actually take into a dungeon. Walking around with a normal ten foot pole not only is a hindrance, but also looks freakin' stupid.
Collapsible poles are not as easy to make as you'd think - particularly not in a medieval setting. I mean, getting the tolerances right, let alone getting a sturdy enough metal alloy!

Wooden poles are much cheaper and less likely to collapse at an inappropriate time. And remember, your hirelings should be carrying your 10' Poles - and everyone knows they look stupid :smalltongue:

Tengu_temp
2009-05-22, 02:06 PM
Hiring personality-less minions with no plot importance as haulers/meatshields is very, very far away from my style of playing RPGs (and so is a game where style is not important). And while a wooden pole might be cheap, it gets in your way a lot - forget about running, fighting, going through tight passages, and not accidentally poking your friends' eyes out. Seriously, just throw rocks instead.


Collapsible poles are not as easy to make as you'd think - particularly not in a medieval setting. I mean, getting the tolerances right, let alone getting a sturdy enough metal alloy!


I bet they're much easier to make than even the cheapest magic items a typical DND world drowns in.

Volkov
2009-05-22, 02:07 PM
Yeah, the ladder thing is just ridiculous.

In all honesty though, they are just one of those things adventurers always feel the need to buy. They've been a part of the game forever.

You use them to poke around for traps, cross small pits, scratch itches you can't reach, etc.

Due to their ubiquity, many traps now trigger area effects that have a range of ten feet. But don't despair! Our finest gnome engineers are working around the clock, and it's thought that in a year or two the eleven foot pole will be a reality.
Suck it, I have a 42 foot pole. It's got the power of life, the universe, and everything!

ericgrau
2009-05-22, 02:17 PM
The relatively high price of the 10 foot pole comes from the exceedingly high demand by adventurers for poking at traps, puzzles and other things in a dungeon. The thing is, no crazy rich adventurer has time to split ladders into 10 foot poles, but they sure can pay for the pole. Meanwhile the shopkeepers are taking big sticks they found on the ground or honed from cheap lumber and are selling them for major profit... but only from adventurers. They're already overstocked for this niche buyer and would not make additional profit from making more, be it from ladders or otherwise.

shadzar
2009-05-22, 02:46 PM
Hiring personality-less minions with no plot importance as haulers/meatshields is very, very far away from my style of playing RPGs (and so is a game where style is not important).

So you don't like Nodwick I take it?

Oracle_Hunter
2009-05-22, 02:48 PM
Hiring personality-less minions with no plot importance as haulers/meatshields is very, very far away from my style of playing RPGs (and so is a game where style is not important). And while a wooden pole might be cheap, it gets in your way a lot - forget about running, fighting, going through tight passages, and not accidentally poking your friends' eyes out. Seriously, just throw rocks instead.
Feh!

Back in the day, every village alchemist couldn't mix up a Sunrod, let alone an Everburning Torch; you needed a 5th Level Cleric to cast Continual Light on a metal rod! And good luck finding a 5th Level Cleric at all, let alone one willing to waste his one spell slot on Continual Light instead of, say, Cure Disease.

That's why everyone had real torches and lanterns; which you needed to keep dry and make sure you had enough fuel to get in and out of a dungeon. These days its a wonder that they even bother making lanterns when any Andy Adventurer with 50 gp to rub together can just pick up an Everburning Torch at the local A-Mart!

And who said Hirelings didn't have personality? Hell, a Paladin couldn't hire anyone who wasn't LG without Falling - and there weren't no simple Atonement spell to fix that neither! *shakes cane*

*ahem*
But more seriously, rocks rarely hit tripwires nor do they provide enough force to trip a pressure plate - unless you carry around some really heavy rocks.

And, of course, you have identified a major difference between TSR D&D and WotC D&D - TSR focused exclusively on "simulation" while WotC has focused on "awesome." It's things like this that make me chuckle when people crow about how much they care about simulation while never bothering to wonder how they can fight with all this crap strapped to their back.

Anyhoo, it is certainly a matter of taste. TSR D&D was a Player-testing game; WotC D&D is a Character-testing game.

Radar
2009-05-22, 02:55 PM
Hiring personality-less minions with no plot importance as haulers/meatshields is very, very far away from my style of playing RPGs (and so is a game where style is not important). And while a wooden pole might be cheap, it gets in your way a lot - forget about running, fighting, going through tight passages, and not accidentally poking your friends' eyes out. Seriously, just throw rocks instead.
(...)
Shoes would make a nicer reference. :smallbiggrin:

As it is, i never played a typical D&D dungeon romp, but if our group decides to do it, i will surly stock up any mundane item, that enchances my chances of survival and a telescopic 21ft pole would be on the list.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-05-22, 03:05 PM
It's things like this that make me chuckle when people crow about how much they care about simulation while never bothering to wonder how they can fight with all this crap strapped to their back.Look at what the army currently carries into battle. 55-60 lbs, last I checked, depending on the unit. Heck, midieval full-plate was a hundred lbs, and knights were expected to fight in not only that, but carrying other gear, including multiple weapons and a large shield. My Rogue and his HHH are a non-issue.

Tengu_temp
2009-05-22, 03:06 PM
So you don't like Nodwick I take it?

I don't read it, but I know what's it about, and I don't dislike it - it's a webcomic, not an RPG I'm playing, after all. I enjoy 8-Bit Theater, Goblins or Commissioned's RPG strips, for example, but I wouldn't play in a campaign that looks like any of them unless my life depended on it.



Anyhoo, it is certainly a matter of taste. TSR D&D was a Player-testing game; WotC D&D is a Character-testing game.

I agree, except that I wouldn't call the other approach "WotC DND" - character- and story-heavy games with little dungeoncrawling predate DND 3.0 by a long time.


Heck, midieval full-plate was a hundred lbs, and knights were expected to fight in not only that, but carrying other gear, including multiple weapons and a large shield.

That's a common misconception - what idiot would wear an armor he can't move in to battle? Field plate was much lighter and a trained, strong man could move in one with little difficulty - it's the thick, heavily ornate tournament plate that was very heavy, but nobody worn that to real combat.

Keld Denar
2009-05-22, 03:34 PM
You guys need to go read the origional White Plume Mountain (http://www.amazon.com/White-Plume-Mountain-Greyhawk-Novels/dp/0786914246/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243024351&sr=1-1) novel. Its a genre classic. And yes, there is a 10' pole in it. And yes, it does serve MULTIPLE roles throughout the course of the book, and YES, the main character didn't feel it would be useful at first, but was ultimately thankful when his teamster cohort had it along.

That'll get ya learned up!

And awwww....there is even an obligatory Tome of Horrors reference in the editorial review.

Justin B.
2009-05-22, 03:43 PM
If you're so concerned with looking stupid and not being able to fight with your pole, simply wield a longspear. You can use it for all the things you're talking about, and it's a servicable weapon by anyones standards. Besides, throw that shrinking enchantment from Races of the Wild on it, and you're golden.

Roderick_BR
2009-05-22, 03:56 PM
No you can't. It still only does d6 damage with a -4 proficiency penalty on the attack roll.
Indeed. People seems to forget that D&D has no momentum. The instant the last guy tries to throw it, it loses all the speed.

If that thing worked, a monk could use his 190+ movement to throw stick-grenades because of the speed (180ft in 6 seconds, not counting running cheese. I'm sure someone could calculate the damage).

Quietus
2009-05-22, 04:11 PM
That's a common misconception - what idiot would wear an armor he can't move in to battle? Field plate was much lighter and a trained, strong man could move in one with little difficulty - it's the thick, heavily ornate tournament plate that was very heavy, but nobody worn that to real combat.

Medieval Knights in full plate (mounted, of course) wore armor they could barely move in. If you got them off their horses, they couldn't get themselves back on, and anyone could easily run around them in circles. The moment one of these knights was knocked to the ground, they were no better off than a turtle.

That's why they had squires; Someone to help them stand back up, and get back on their horses.

Yuki Akuma
2009-05-22, 04:14 PM
If you think a ten foot pole is going to get in the way, carry one that unscrews into three 3'4" parts. You know, like a pool cue?

Premier
2009-05-22, 04:16 PM
Medieval Knights in full plate (mounted, of course) wore armor they could barely move in. If you got them off their horses, they couldn't get themselves back on, and anyone could easily run around them in circles. The moment one of these knights was knocked to the ground, they were no better off than a turtle.

That's why they had squires; Someone to help them stand back up, and get back on their horses.

A misconception that was very popular up the, I guess, 80-s, maybe even a bit later. The truth is, people wearing recreation armour weighting about the same as historical suits can, after some practice, even do cartwheels in them.

Starscream
2009-05-22, 04:18 PM
If that thing worked, a monk could use his 190+ movement to throw stick-grenades because of the speed (180ft in 6 seconds, not counting running cheese. I'm sure someone could calculate the damage).

You sir have just fixed the monk class.

All this talk about the 10 foot pole is making me think about that episode of the Simpsons where Employee of the Month is given to an "Inanimate Carbon Rod" instead of Homer.

There needs to be a official Ten Foot Pole award for usefulness.

Tengu_temp
2009-05-22, 04:32 PM
Medieval Knights in full plate (mounted, of course) wore armor they could barely move in. If you got them off their horses, they couldn't get themselves back on, and anyone could easily run around them in circles. The moment one of these knights was knocked to the ground, they were no better off than a turtle.

That's why they had squires; Someone to help them stand back up, and get back on their horses.

http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t64/Coyoteesharptongue/lex-luthor-wrong1.jpg


While it looks heavy, a full plate armour set could be as light as only 20 kg (45 pounds) if well made of tempered steel. This is less than the weight of modern combat gear of an infantry soldier (usually 25 to 35 kg), and the weight is more evenly distributed. The weight was so well spread over the body that a fit man could run, or jump into his saddle. Modern re-enactment activity has proven it is even possible to swim in armour, though it is difficult. It is possible for a fit and trained man in armour to run after and catch an unarmoured archer, as witnessed in re-enactment combat. The notion that it was necessary to lift a fully armed knight onto his horse with the help of pulleys is a myth originating in Mark Twain's A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. (And, in fact, the mere existence of plate armor during King Arthur era is a myth as well: 6th century knights would've worn chainmail instead.) Even knights in enormously heavy jousting armour were not winched onto their horses. This type of "sporting" armour was meant only for ceremonial lancing matches and its design was deliberately made extremely thick to protect the wearer from severe accidents, such as the one which caused the death of King Henry II of France.

Tournament armour is always heavier, clumsier and more protective than combat armour. The rationale is that nobody wants to get killed in a game, but on battlefield the question is about life and death, and mobility and endurance is more important aspect on combat survival than mere passive protection. Therefore combat armour is a compromise between protection and mobility, while tournament armour merely stresses protection on cost of mobility.

Oracle_Hunter
2009-05-22, 04:33 PM
I agree, except that I wouldn't call the other approach "WotC DND" - character- and story-heavy games with little dungeoncrawling predate DND 3.0 by a long time.
No no, you misunderstand.

As a veteran of the Edition Warz (with the scars to prove it :smalltongue:) I spent a lot of time thinking about the other incarnations of D&D and here's what I determined:

TSR D&D is focused primarily on The Story
WotC D&D is focused primarily on The Characters

EXPLANATION

TSR D&D
TSR D&D editions did little systematization of the game world - basically only making attacks and making damage; even there, it was pretty sparse. Consequently, your character's abilities were of little importance when running a game. At most your Ability Scores provided a crude guide as to your facility with walking tightropes and dancing; most games either had them fiated ("Cedric the Fine knows all the courtly dances; Ragnor the Brute does not") or used Ability Checks when necessary. In short, the information on your character sheet defined very little about your actual PC.

This made TSR D&D a very player-focused game - a crafty player could do more (and better) than a less creative one. However, the DM did still need to figure out some basic "rules" of the world - how fast can I move in a round? How far can I see? How long does it take to put on armor? To this end, TSR did some serious research and tried to convert real-world information into simpler game effects. This gave you encumbrance, march speeds and the infravision/ultravision debates.

So we have a system where the players, not their characters, largely determine their personal effectiveness and one where simulation of contemporary realities is important. A side effect of this combination is that the life of your average PC was nasty, brutish and short. Life was hard in medieval times and combat was very, very lethal; your average peasant could break his neck falling off a horse, nevermind what an orc with a longsword could do to him. Since your character is unlikely to live very long - and even if he does, his basic stats don't change that much - players needed to focus on the current life & times of their characters.

An adventurer was supposed to live dangerously, die young and leave an excellent tale to pass around taverns.

WotC D&D
When WotC took over D&D, they started systematizing the whole world. Grid-based movement became rationalized (diagonal movement penalties), character skills were defined and could be improved (skill points) and the "heroic feats" that your character could do were defined by Feats. Now you have a very robust character sheet that was plugged into the world as a whole - you want to do something, look up the appropriate rule and make the appropriate checks. No longer did you, the player, need to be particularly smooth to talk past a guard - some basic lies and a Bluff check could allow even the most ham-fisted player to have a charismatic rogue work.

But, when you start systematizing, you also remove a lot of improvisation from the hands of the player. Players can no longer say "I hide behind the rocks and trip him when he walks by" and have the DM just say yes or no; now you make a Hide Check versus Spot and initiate a flat-footed Trip attack to see whether you succeed or not. Rules complexity aside, this sort of systematization encourages players & DMs to try and fit every action into an appropriate box; it is not that a game prevents a player from being creative, but it can create "the box" in their minds and can also make pure improvisation awkward - depending on how the system operates.

Once you start systematizing a world, simulating the real world becomes less important than being able to make everything fit together. WotC used magic to fill in the gaps, but by and large, the game became less about simulating the world and more about the abilities on a given character sheet. This is a trade-off that all RPGs make - there is nothing good or bad about it.

Now we have a world where character sheets are more important than player ingenuity in determining success and failure and one where your character sheet tells you a lot about your general capabilities. With all this effort being spent on defining character abilities and, most importantly, systematizing improvement, the focus on your character sheet's development and growth becomes central. PCs now are expected to live and grow over time, with each level granting new options which can alter your character's abilities radically. Soon, character integrity also rises - what used to be permanent damage to your character sheet (level drain, ability drain) can now be easily rectified by magic.

An adventurer is supposed to grow in power and flexibility over time, facing greater and greater challenges forever - barring serious accidents.
In short:

TSR D&D defined characters so vaguely that the player just couldn't worry too much about the development of their character sheet; their character's story is really all there is.

WotC D&D uses the character sheet as a focal point of your ability to interact with the world; the development of your character sheet is not only central to the meta-narrative but it can easily serve as the focus of a player.
There is a clear and consistent shift in design philosophy as D&D changed owners; it makes for a convenient marker when discussing game design questions.

SilverSheriff
2009-05-22, 04:36 PM
To clarify:

Easy steps to success by abusing the rules:
Step one: Buy ladder
Step two: Break ladder in two
Step three: Sell the tow halfs as ten foot poles
Step four: Profit
Step five: DM cuts your brakes

:smallcool:

Doug Lampert
2009-05-22, 04:36 PM
That's a common misconception - what idiot would wear an armor he can't move in to battle? Field plate was much lighter and a trained, strong man could move in one with little difficulty - it's the thick, heavily ornate tournament plate that was very heavy, but nobody worn that to real combat.

True, most armor was relatively light, even most plate armor was relatively light. Infantry especially doesn't like having more than 40-60lb or so of gear total. And for the most part plate was no exception. If you take required padding into account good plate was typically lighter, less restrictive, and CHEAPER than chain (drawing wire without modern machinery is HARD, plate was a major tech advance, having it side by side with all those other armors is something like having revolutionary war muskets and AK47s o the same battlefield).

All that said there were exceptions. Some suits of full gothic plate got quite heavy prior to falling out of use. And no, not all of this was ceremonial or jousting armor, the surviving cuirass from one suit used in battle in the Hundred Years War is 90lb. Estimates for the full panoply I've seen are 150lb+. Those guys were f*cking strong.

They also rode very very expensive horses that weren't nearly as well armored as the riders and while they weren't helpless on foot the guys who expected to fight on foot wore a lot less than 90lb. Note that the 90lb cuirass was from a French guy, and the French lost that particular battle to English knights whose gear was quite a bit lighter. (The English fought dismounted more often than not, they had to keep the gear lighter.)

OTOH at the siege of Malta had the Turks scr*wed because all they had were guns and cannon, and the knights were in very heavy plate that typically harmlessly bounced the bullets from the guns so you needed a direct hit from a cannon to kill a knight. Seriously, read an account, the Turks resorted to things like carrying big metal hoops with most of the hoop coated with pitch and lighted and trying to get this over a knight's head in the hope that this would be EASIER and MORE EFFECTIVE than just shooting the guy (it probably wasn't, note that the Turks lost rather badly). But note that standing siege the Knights Hospitaler weren't walking far, and their main alternate thing was sea battles where the farthest they had to walk was across the decks of two ships.

The English Civil War provides additional examples of absurd levels of armor being used in actual battle.

So some people did wear 100lb+ armor on the field, but even out of those in plate this sort of thing was normally a trivial minority.

DougL

shadzar
2009-05-22, 04:40 PM
No no, you misunderstand.

As a veteran of the Edition Warz (with the scars to prove it :smalltongue:) I spent a lot of time thinking about the other incarnations of D&D and here's what I determined:

TSR D&D is focused primarily on The Story
WotC D&D is focused primarily on The Characters


As far as the dungeoncrawling part goes, you better ask someone that played with Gary about those monstrosities and you will learn WotC had NOTHING on TSR where dungeon crawls come into it.

Oracle_Hunter
2009-05-22, 04:55 PM
As far as the dungeoncrawling part goes, you better ask someone that played with Gary about those monstrosities and you will learn WotC had NOTHING on TSR where dungeon crawls come into it.
Obviously.

Like I said, TSR D&D is primarily about The Story - and characters are considered expendable. The talents of Mr. Gygax aside, TSR D&D adventurers will be more lethal and require greater Player creativity to succeed.

WotC D&D, on the other hand, is about The Characters. By comparison, a WotC D&D adventure may seem far less lethal than TSR D&D; but that is just because the development of character sheets is central to the system structure. Furthermore, character sheet abilities are going to be the greatest asset in a WotC module - you can't find secret doors by turning torches anymore :smalltongue:

shadzar
2009-05-22, 05:13 PM
Obviously.

Like I said, TSR D&D is primarily about The Story - and characters are considered expendable. The talents of Mr. Gygax aside, TSR D&D adventurers will be more lethal and require greater Player creativity to succeed.

WotC D&D, on the other hand, is about The Characters. By comparison, a WotC D&D adventure may seem far less lethal than TSR D&D; but that is just because the development of character sheets is central to the system structure. Furthermore, character sheet abilities are going to be the greatest asset in a WotC module - you can't find secret doors by turning torches anymore :smalltongue:

:smallredface: .sdrawkcab ti gnidaer saw I

Azernak0
2009-05-22, 06:42 PM
If that thing worked, a monk could use his 190+ movement to throw stick-grenades because of the speed (180ft in 6 seconds, not counting running cheese. I'm sure someone could calculate the damage).


A level 18 Monk/1 Barbarian Half-Orc moves at 100 feet. Add in Haste and he moves at 130 feet as a move action. The Sprint feat lets him move an additional 10 feet, so he is up to 140. He has the feat Run, so with a total move he runs at 700 feet in 6 seconds. This equates to 79.55 MPH or a little more than 128 KPH, which is funny already.

He can carry 100 pounds and still run. The formula to discover the Muzzle Energy (a way of figuring out the relative destructive force of a bullet) is E = 1/2mv^2, where Mass is measured in kilograms and Velocity is measured in meters per second. A 9mm round has a Muzzle Energy of 561 Joules. The Modern SRD states that a pistol does 2d6 damage or 7 average.
A 45.36 kilo weight traveling at 35.36 meters per second: the weight would hit with a total Muzzle Energy of ~28,357 Joules. This is 50 and a half times more lethal than a pistol round, average of 353.8 damage. The formula is not perfect with non-bullet items but its sttill funny.

charl
2009-05-22, 06:56 PM
That made my day.

Berserk Monk
2009-05-22, 06:57 PM
You carry it along in case one of the party members decides to go paladin so you can insert it up their ass.

Keld Denar
2009-05-22, 07:10 PM
A level 18 Monk/1 Barbarian Half-Orc moves at 100 feet. Add in Haste and he moves at 130 feet as a move action. The Sprint feat lets him move an additional 10 feet, so he is up to 140. He has the feat Run, so with a total move he runs at 700 feet in 6 seconds. This equates to 79.55 MPH or a little more than 128 KPH, which is funny already.

Your maths are fine, but your optimization-fu is weak. First of all, a Monk's speed increase is an Enhancement bonus, which doesn't stack with other Enhancement bonuses to speed....like....Haste.

Better would be a Dark Xeph Wildshape Monk/Barbarian who was Psionically Focus using the feat Cheetah [Wild Shape] feat from Complete Divine.

Better yet would be a Ruby Knight Vindicator ending an Extended Persisted Footsteps of the Divine after casting Greater Visage of the Diety devoted to Farlanghan....but thats the ultimate in silliness, and the setter of records which include highest number of foes thrown into low orbit in a single round and largest landmass lit abaze in 6 seconds.

Flickerdart
2009-05-22, 07:16 PM
I find that a sack of bolts a la Roadside Picnic has a lot more style to it than a silly-looking pole.

TheCountAlucard
2009-05-22, 07:24 PM
It's got the power of life, the universe, and everything!It's got the power of the Ultimate Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything. Big difference. :smalltongue:

WeeFreeMen
2009-05-22, 07:46 PM
Reasons why you need a 11 foot pole-

"Tomb of Horrors"

The end.

shadow_archmagi
2009-05-22, 08:08 PM
Not to interrupt your plate armor debate, but I thought "encumberance difficulties" was referring the difficulty of walking about with a 10 foot pole, lantern, 20 sheets of paper, a half a goat, and giant kazoo strapped to you and jostling about.

Chronos
2009-05-22, 09:00 PM
A ten-foot pole is the one piece of mundane equipment I don't buy for all my characters. There is just no good way to carry around a ten-foot pole, especially not in narrow corridors in dungeons. Sure, you could get a henchman, but there's also no good way for a henchman to carry around a ten-foot pole, either.

I'd be all over those 12' collapsible poles, though, if I played in a campaign that used Dungeonscape.

Volkov
2009-05-22, 09:30 PM
My 42 foot pole is secretly a lord of epic lordly might. I shall rule over 90,000 hd worth of subjects! MUAHAHAHHAHAHAAHA!

Asbestos
2009-05-22, 09:55 PM
A ten-foot pole is the one piece of mundane equipment I don't buy for all my characters. There is just no good way to carry around a ten-foot pole, especially not in narrow corridors in dungeons. Sure, you could get a henchman, but there's also no good way for a henchman to carry around a ten-foot pole, either.

Not just awkward in dungeons. How about a thick forest, a crowded city, or even just the local tavern?



I'd be all over those 12' collapsible poles, though, if I played in a campaign that used Dungeonscape.

But... acid breathing sharks! (and a great fighter variant)

@Shadow-Archmagi: You can stuff most of that (except the pole) into the other half of the goat.

Oracle_Hunter
2009-05-22, 10:08 PM
A ten-foot pole is the one piece of mundane equipment I don't buy for all my characters. There is just no good way to carry around a ten-foot pole, especially not in narrow corridors in dungeons. Sure, you could get a henchman, but there's also no good way for a henchman to carry around a ten-foot pole, either.

I'd be all over those 12' collapsible poles, though, if I played in a campaign that used Dungeonscape.
Hirelings don't need to be graceful; they're in the back, ready to hand you stuff as you need it.

Now, it is true that working a 10' pole through goblin warrens is nigh impossible, but in most human-sized dungeons, it is certainly possible.

As for taverns - why, having a hireling with a 10' pole is practically the calling card of an adventurer! How do you expect to get Plot Hooks if people can't tell you're an adventurer :smalltongue:

Flickerdart
2009-05-22, 10:09 PM
As for taverns - why, having a hireling with a 10' pole is practically the calling card of an adventurer! How do you expect to get Plot Hooks if people can't tell you're an adventurer :smalltongue:
Yeah, you put a hook on the end of the pole and let the fun begin. Who needs the Arcane Trickster's Ranged Legerdemain? You have a TEN FOOT POLE!

Chronos
2009-05-22, 10:20 PM
Not just awkward in dungeons. How about a thick forest, a crowded city, or even just the local tavern?I have actually carried a couple of ten-foot poles a couple of miles through a city. And then up and down eight flights of a tightly-wound staircase, several times. You don't need to tell me they're awkward.

Oracle_Hunter
2009-05-22, 11:12 PM
I have actually carried a couple of ten-foot poles a couple of miles through a city. And then up and down eight flights of a tightly-wound staircase, several times. You don't need to tell me they're awkward.
What dungeon were you crawling? Find any good loot? :smalltongue:

shadzar
2009-05-23, 06:46 AM
Not to interrupt your plate armor debate, but I thought "encumberance difficulties" was referring the difficulty of walking about with a 10 foot pole, lantern, 20 sheets of paper, a half a goat, and giant kazoo strapped to you and jostling about.

Encumberance only deals with the wieght of items that you could carry before it starts affecting you speed of movement.

While a 10'-pole weighting say 10-lbs may not encumber you much in that respect, the problem would come in like anything else where size and shape of items aren't ever concerned about.

More games than not most items are just "assumed" to fit where the character can.

Take at look at how much GP a STR 18 character could carry without being too encumbered, and then look at the size of it.

So that 10'-pole could not slow you down due to weight, it could hamper you getting into narrow places or tight corners.

shadow_archmagi
2009-05-23, 07:44 AM
So, one thing I always wondered about.

Traditional logic for the weight of gold (as far as I know)
1. One LB of gold=50 gp.
2. Ergo, 50 gp weigh 1 pound.
3. Gold's density is XXX, so that means each coin is XXX big.


But what if the coins are more/less valuable than the gold, on the grounds that one is just a brick wheras the other has been forged, refined, and (depending on setting) stamped with the face of the local king?

darkblust
2009-05-23, 08:16 AM
I'm surprised that nobody has brought this up in this thread,but have you thought of the possibilities of a drunken master with a 10 foot pole?thats 1d12 damage within 10 feet,and if you have the feat whirlwind attack,which incase you did'nt know lets you attack all enemies within range,you would be a killing machine.plus since you have to be a monk pretty much to become a drunken master,you could get a flurry of blows their if your dm would allow you to use it as a quarterstaff or made a feat for monk proficiancy of 10 foot poles.Soooo many hits,so little time!!!....

TheCountAlucard
2009-05-23, 08:19 AM
One LB of gold=10 gp.Actually, 50 gp, at least in 3.5ed.

shadow_archmagi
2009-05-23, 08:44 AM
Actually, 50 gp, at least in 3.5ed.

you misquoted me and I didn't ninja edit.

Matthew
2009-05-23, 09:18 AM
So, one thing I always wondered about.

Traditional logic for the weight of gold (as far as I know)
1. One LB of gold=50 gp.
2. Ergo, 50 gp weigh 1 pound.
3. Gold's density is XXX, so that means each coin is XXX big.


But what if the coins are more/less valuable than the gold, on the grounds that one is just a brick wheras the other has been forged, refined, and (depending on setting) stamped with the face of the local king?

Coins were very frequently "weighed", rather than directly used for their denomination. Nonetheless, the value of a coin relative to pure metal and goods in an "authentic" society would be always in flux, typically requiring an authoritative government to have a fixed internal value. In D20/3e (and AD&D/2e) a coin is simply worth 1/50 of the metal it is made of, and purely for the sake of convenience.

Tengu_temp
2009-05-23, 10:41 AM
I find that a sack of bolts a la Roadside Picnic has a lot more style to it than a silly-looking pole.

Your knowledge of classical science fiction literature earns you a cookie.

Flickerdart
2009-05-23, 10:59 AM
Your knowledge of classical science fiction literature earns you a cookie.
And as always, the movie version wasn't as good.

Chronos
2009-05-23, 11:51 AM
Take at look at how much GP a STR 18 character could carry without being too encumbered, and then look at the size of it.GP won't be a problem, since gold is one of the densest substances known (certainly the densest that shows up in RPGs), so even a very large weight of it will take up only a very small volume. A str 18 gives you a maximum load of 300 lbs, and a 300 lb cube of gold would only be about 7.5 inches on a side. You'd only get a problem if you're carrying 300 pounds of wood, or something similarly light.

shadzar
2009-05-23, 01:40 PM
So, one thing I always wondered about.

Traditional logic for the weight of gold (as far as I know)
1. One LB of gold=50 gp.
2. Ergo, 50 gp weigh 1 pound.
3. Gold's density is XXX, so that means each coin is XXX big.


But what if the coins are more/less valuable than the gold, on the grounds that one is just a brick wheras the other has been forged, refined, and (depending on setting) stamped with the face of the local king?

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1062296

looks there for some info on coins and specific gravity, at least with 4th edition.

Otherwise it is assumed that you really aren't going by the weight of gold itself to raise or lower the value of coins, that can be done with prices in difference areas and things just costing more or les in some places.

So say town Y has a higher gold content that town B.

The dragon horde you just got could buy more in town B probably than in town Y, because of this. The prices in Y would be higher since they are on a higher standard, and B would be cheaper since they are on a lower standard.

But the weight of a single coin will roughly be seen as the same for ease of encumbrance and such for most people.

There are people that will in fact tailor coins to different area with different than standard weight/value to the standard gold piece. Those are some fun games!

chiasaur11
2009-05-23, 02:04 PM
What dungeon were you crawling? Find any good loot? :smalltongue:

No, just a remarkable amount of Gygaxian deathtraps.

And an angry Grue.

Chronos
2009-05-23, 02:30 PM
Actually, the loot I got out of it was a few dozen tomatoes and a handful of peppers, since I was using them as part of a greenhouse I constructed in my garden.

Yahzi
2009-05-24, 12:09 AM
Medieval Knights in full plate (mounted, of course) wore armor they could barely move in. If you got them off their horses, they couldn't get themselves back on, and anyone could easily run around them in circles. The moment one of these knights was knocked to the ground, they were no better off than a turtle.
No.

Medieval knights carried no more than 120 lbs of gear into battle. Which, interestingly, is pretty much what modern combat soldiers carrying into battle.

You're thinking of tourney armor, which was only worn for a short period during games and might not have even existed at all.

Yahzi
2009-05-24, 12:15 AM
But what if the coins are more/less valuable than the gold, on the grounds that one is just a brick wheras the other has been forged, refined, and (depending on setting) stamped with the face of the local king?
Now you're talking about Seigniorage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seigniorage).

ericgrau
2009-05-24, 10:29 AM
3.5 weights actually have some carry over from 2e encumbrance. Some weights, such as weapon weights, are higher than what's realistic because poles are more encumbering than concentrated loads. Thus your 18 strength character can still only carry 300 lbs. of gold and only 300 lbs. of longswords (stacked, using both arms, I'm sure). The difference is that "300 lbs." of longswords is only 75 swords, rather than a more realistic 100 to 120 swords.

Note that you can "lift over head" twice this amount and, "push/drag" 5 times this amount. It just takes you a full round action to move 5 feet and this provokes an attack of opportunity. I'm not sure if there are fatigue rules for this, but a reasonable DM would probably say that you couldn't move very far without tiring either. 300 lbs. is just the limit for carrying the stuff while slowly walking all day long.

lisiecki
2009-05-24, 02:09 PM
I have yet to encounter a ladder where the stringers are cylindrical



To clarify:

Easy steps to success by abusing the rules:
Step one: Buy ladder
Step two: Break ladder in two
Step three: Sell the tow halfs as ten foot poles
Step four: Profit
Step five: ???

shadzar
2009-05-24, 02:49 PM
I have yet to encounter a ladder where the stringers are cylindrical

Not to mention removing the rungs weakens them form being used as levers for anything like lifting or using in some cranking device for best leverage.

And who wants to carry around a 10' ladder to take apart when you need a pole and put back together when you need a ladder?

lisiecki
2009-05-24, 03:03 PM
Not to mention removing the rungs weakens them form being used as levers for anything like lifting or using in some cranking device for best leverage.

Ive NEVER seen the argument "we take a 10' ladder and sell it to the shop keeper

Ok you take in in the store and he says... What?

"This isn't cylindrical, its Dimensional lumber, and there are holes at evenly spaced intervals. Howabout you get the hell out of my store, before I beat you senseless for trying to sell me broken goods."

charl
2009-05-24, 04:10 PM
Why not simply use the ladder in the same manner you would the pole? Sure it takes up extra space but it's just as good for poking around with (maybe a little more unwieldy, but still usable).

Flickerdart
2009-05-24, 04:19 PM
Why not simply use the ladder in the same manner you would the pole? Sure it takes up extra space but it's just as good for poking around with (maybe a little more unwieldy, but still usable).
It wouldn't fit down narrow openings nearly as well.

Starscream
2009-05-24, 05:34 PM
"This isn't cylindrical, its Dimensional lumber, and there are holes at evenly spaced intervals. Howabout you get the hell out of my store, before I beat you senseless for trying to sell me broken goods."

:smalleek:
There are standardized requirements for something to qualify as a ten foot pole? Gods forbid someone pokes around for a trap with a stick that isn't perfectly cylindrical.

That being said, the real reason the "break up a ladder" method of wealth accumulation would never work is that no shopkeeper in his right mind would ever buy something so stupid as a stick. There's a reason clubs and quarterstaffs are free in D&D, you can find something that works just fine by poking around the woods for five minutes.

Presumably the only reason the PHB lists them as a buyable item anyway is that the ones on sale are collapsible or telescoping or something for easier tansportation, something you can't get by taking a branch off a tree or separating a ladder.

lisiecki
2009-05-24, 05:48 PM
Why not simply use the ladder in the same manner you would the pole? Sure it takes up extra space but it's just as good for poking around with (maybe a little more unwieldy, but still usable).

well

Yes

but then again you could always duct-tape 30-40 daggers to one another and do the same

shadzar
2009-05-24, 06:25 PM
well

Yes

but then again you could always duct-tape 30-40 daggers to one another and do the same

:smalleek: Where you getting duct-tape from?

lisiecki
2009-05-24, 07:04 PM
:smalleek: Where you getting duct-tape from?

Wish spells

lisiecki
2009-05-24, 07:06 PM
Well...
Yes...
It has to be 10 feet long.
And a pole.





:smalleek:
There are standardized requirements for something to qualify as a ten foot pole?

MickJay
2009-05-24, 07:08 PM
Or from the same place that sells long sticks for ridiculous amounts of money, as if buying a 10ft pole was the only way to get a stick ~3m long (because cutting down a young tree and chopping off its branches is an impossibility). Unless, you know, you want to have your 10ft pole come with a certificate that confirms it is exactly 120 inches long...

shadzar
2009-05-24, 07:53 PM
Or from the same place that sells long sticks for ridiculous amounts of money, as if buying a 10ft pole was the only way to get a stick ~3m long (because cutting down a young tree and chopping off its branches is an impossibility). Unless, you know, you want to have your 10ft pole come with a certificate that confirms it is exactly 120 inches long...

OR trees don't grow perfectly straight.

charl
2009-05-24, 08:21 PM
OR trees don't grow perfectly straight.

Then you find a bigger tree.

Or use a spell to summon/create/shape/emulate the pole.

EDIT: Now I have to go homebrew the "Summon Ten-Foot Pole" cantrip.

monty
2009-05-24, 08:24 PM
EDIT: Now I have to go homebrew the "Summon Ten-Foot Pole" cantrip.

I want this.

Flickerdart
2009-05-24, 08:27 PM
Nonsense! You may only summon 1ft/CL of pole. Giving an entire 10 feet to a first level caster further exacerbates the gap between spells and mundane abilities. Who needs Trapfinding now that Wizards can conjure poles out of the wazoo? Who needs Paladins when the stick up the butt can be available to anyone whenever they want it? Congrats, a cantrip has just rendered 2 classes obsolete. :smalltongue:

charl
2009-05-24, 08:38 PM
I want this.

And you can!


Summon Ten-Foot Pole
Conjuration (Summoning)
Level: Sor/Wiz 0
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 full-round action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Duration: 1 hour + 1 hour/2 levels
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No

You summon a straight, cylindrical wooden pole of exactly 10 feet in length. This pole is taken from a random source somewhere on the planes, and is sent back to the same place after the end of the spell duration. It can not be summoned into a space not large enough to hold it and requires a level surface with a down-ward gravitational pull (and thus the pole can not be summoned to be used as an improvised falling projectile). The pole has no special properties.


Now, since the pole has to come from somewhere, expect evil DM's to occasionally say that your pole disappears just to come back a few hours later, when you no longer need it.

DamnedIrishman
2009-05-24, 09:26 PM
And you can!


Summon Ten-Foot Pole
Conjuration (Summoning)
Level: Sor/Wiz 0
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 full-round action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Duration: 1 hour + 1 hour/2 levels
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No

You summon a straight, cylindrical wooden pole of exactly 10 feet in length. This pole is taken from a random source somewhere on the planes, and is sent back to the same place after the end of the spell duration. It can not be summoned into a space not large enough to hold it and requires a level surface with a down-ward gravitational pull (and thus the pole can not be summoned to be used as an improvised falling projectile). The pole has no special properties.


Now, since the pole has to come from somewhere, expect evil DM's to occasionally say that your pole disappears just to come back a few hours later, when you no longer need it.

Why not a spell that summons Pinnochio's nose? Every time you tell a lie, it gets longer. In case ten feet just isn't far enough.