[AD&D] Rules questions (my players stay out, I don't want you knowing too much)

[Thelas]

Just answer whatever you can, please. (The module is 2nd ed, but we're playing OSRIC and I was told that they're close enough to not matter).
A poison mentions "Str 30/2d6". What does that mean? I assume not the same as in 3.5, but...
A sword is mentioned as a sword +1, +3 vs. lycanthropes and shape changers that is "treated as a normal weapon against vampires". Does this mean a sword +1 against them, a masterwork sword (are those even in AD&D?), or as a mundane sword?
Just as a reminder: please confirm that 2 ep = 1 gp, and that 5 sp = 1 ep.
What exactly is ML, anyways?
"SD +1 needed to hit" means "at least a +1 magical weapon needed to inflict damage upon", right?
What does "MR special" mean?
The module says "a magical dagger +2, Vampire Slayer. When this special dagger strikes a vampire, its blade will turn to wood." Is this a good thing, and if so, how? If not, is it some sort of curse or something?
What are the different classes of poison?
How do you calculate THAC0 based off of 1st ed/OSRIC tables?
Explain "Ravenloft powers check"s, "Horror checks", and all similar things... (Why does WotC publish these modules for free on their site with no explanations?)
How do you run combats with 180 skellies or ridiculous numbers like that? I definitely don't have that many minis, that's for sure.
I know Ravenloft is supposed to terrify, confuse, and play on the players; fears (*evil DM laugh*), but this module's confusing me. Any help?
What is the difference between 'goblins' and 'goblyns'?
"The land will do all that it can to..." Sentient land? Did I fail my Knowledge(AD&D Campaign Setting) check? [And yes, I know they didn't have those back in AD&D days]. Can someone give me a +10 circumstance bonus and a retry on the check? (As in, can I have useful information?)
Where can I find stats for magic items not statted out in the module?
"Int Very" means "Very High Int", right?
--------
And if you've run the module (Feast of Goblyns, available on the 1e/2e downloads section of WotC stuff), what should the APL be, any tips for a new (at least to AD&D) DM, and what magic items should the PCs get?
[I'm planning to run this as a one-shot, possibly continuing if it's liked.]
(Just answer whatever questions you can, of course).

[Siosilvar]

A sword is mentioned as a sword +1, +3 vs. lycanthropes and shape changers that is "treated as a normal weapon against vampires". Does this mean a sword +1 against them, a masterwork sword (are those even in AD&D?), or as a mundane sword? Mundane.

Just as a reminder: please confirm that 2 ep = 1 gp, and that 5 sp = 1 ep. 10 sp = 1 ep, but yes.

"SD +1 needed to hit" means "at least a +1 magical weapon needed to inflict damage upon", right? Yes.

What does "MR special" mean? Magic Resistance: Special.

The module says "a magical dagger +2, Vampire Slayer. When this special dagger strikes a vampire, its blade will turn to wood." Is this a good thing, and if so, how? If not, is it some sort of curse or something? I'd assume it's good, because a wooden stake through the heart will kill a vampire.

How do you calculate THAC0 based off of 1st ed/OSRIC tables? You grab the To-Hit number listed to hit AC0. :smallwink:

How do you run combats with 180 skellies or ridiculous numbers like that? I definitely don't have that many minis, that's for sure. About 10 at a time.

Where can I find stats for magic items not statted out in the module? Er... given that it's OSRIC, I assume you don't have a DMG, so I'm not sure...

"Int Very" means "Very High Int", right? Yes. The descriptors roughly translate to numbers, but really it's a description of how you play the monster.10characters

[Matthew]

Just answer whatever you can, please. (The module is 2nd ed, but we're playing OSRIC and I was told that they're close enough to not matter).

Correct. :smallbiggrin:

Q. A poison mentions "Str 30/2d6". What does that mean? I assume not the same as in 3.5, but...
A. Its the strength of damage. failed save is 30 HP, passed save is 2d6.

Q. A sword is mentioned as a sword +1, +3 vs. lycanthropes and shape changers that is "treated as a normal weapon against vampires". Does this mean a sword +1 against them, a masterwork sword (are those even in AD&D?), or as a mundane sword?
A. Ordinarily it is a +1 sword. Versus shapechangers it is +3, versus Vampires it is treated as non-magical (meaning it cannot hurt them)

Q. Just as a reminder: please confirm that 2 ep = 1 gp, and that 5 sp = 1 ep.
A. Yes, but in first edition 20 SP = 1 GP.

Q. What exactly is ML, anyways?
A. Morale

Q. "SD +1 needed to hit" means "at least a +1 magical weapon needed to inflict damage upon", right?
A. Yes.

Q. What does "MR special" mean?
A. Some sort of Magic Resistance that is not expressed as a percentage.

Q. The module says "a magical dagger +2, Vampire Slayer. When this special dagger strikes a vampire, its blade will turn to wood." Is this a good thing, and if so, how? If not, is it some sort of curse or something?
A. Possibly it means instant death for the vampire as it is a "stake"; could just be flavour text, though.

Q. What are the different classes of poison?
A. A through P, basically different strengths of damage. In first edition it was pretty much always instant death/save or die.

Q. How do you calculate THAC0 based off of 1st ed/OSRIC tables?
A. Look along the AC 0 row and compare to level. So, if you have a level 1 fighter, you would cross reference and find "20". However, some very low powered creatures will have an effective THAC0 of 21 because of the repeating 20s rule.

Q. Explain "Ravenloft powers check"s, "Horror checks", and all similar things... (Why does WotC publish these modules for free on their site with no explanations?)
A. Hmmn; have to take a look, get back to you on this.

Q. How do you run combats with 180 skellies or ridiculous numbers like that? I definitely don't have that many minis, that's for sure.
A. See other thread.

Q. I know Ravenloft is supposed to terrify, confuse, and play on the players; fears (*evil DM laugh*), but this module's confusing me. Any help?
What is the difference between 'goblins' and 'goblyns'?
A. No idea; possibly nothing. I will have a look and get back to you. [edit] They are detailed in the appendix of the adventure, and appear to be a variation on the standard goblin.

Q. "The land will do all that it can to..." Sentient land? Did I fail my Knowledge (AD&D Campaign Setting) check? [And yes, I know they didn't have those back in AD&D days]. Can someone give me a +10 circumstance bonus and a retry on the check? (As in, can I have useful information?)
A. Yeah, Ravenloft domains are bizarre. Not sure what it can do, have to take a look at the module.

Q. Where can I find stats for magic items not statted out in the module?
A. Probably in the OSRIC magic item appendix. If not, they may be particular to a supplement like Tome of Magic.

Q. "Int Very" means "Very High Int", right?
A. Yes, here is the range:

0 Nonintelligent or not rateable
1 Animal intelligence
2-4 Semi-intelligent
5-7 Low intelligence
8-10 Average (human) intelligence
11-12 Very intelligent
13-14 Highly intelligent
15-16 Exceptionally intelligent
17-18 Genius
19-20 Supra-genius
21+ Godlike intelligence

[Thelas]

EP: Wait, which part is wrong then? Is it that 10 sp = 1 ep or that 4 ep = 1 gp? (I'd guess the former).
INT: Aha, that's why people seem stupid a lot of the time. If the average human INT is from 8 to 10, the average IQ is 80 to 100, not 90 to 110 like they say.
Horror checks, etc...: This part is just really confusing me... as much help as possible will be appreciated.
New questions:
- How long does a 2nd ed round last? I know in 1st ed they're supposed to last 1 minute and contain 10 segments or something like that, but I don't know enough about 2nd ed, as per usual.
- Is there a difference between 18/00 and 19 STR, and which is the general one to use most often?
- What is a "save vs death magic": a save vs death or a save vs magic?
- Just repeating the question on horror checks. I think I'll really need to understand what they are by the time I start this campaign, which admittedly won't be that soon, but still...

Thanks for the help so far!

[Thane of Fife]

Explain "Ravenloft powers check"s, "Horror checks", and all similar things... (Why does WotC publish these modules for free on their site with no explanations?)

"The land will do all that it can to..." Sentient land? Did I fail my Knowledge(AD&D Campaign Setting) check? [And yes, I know they didn't have those back in AD&D days]. Can someone give me a +10 circumstance bonus and a retry on the check? (As in, can I have useful information?)


1. Well, the assumption is that you would have the Ravenloft boxed set when running these adventures.

While I cannot say with certainty, I believe that a Powers Check would be that, when one does something terribly evil, one may attract the attention of the dark forces of Ravenloft. If one does, then one may be gifted with some sort of power at the cost of some terrible curse. A sort of dark temptation, if you will.

I think that a Horror check is basically a super saving throw vs fear, but I am, again, uncertain.

2. Ravenloft is essentially alive and malicious. I don't know precisely what it can do, but I'd generally make things unpleasant for the PCs. Rain ruins their equipment, fog causes them to blunder into enemies or dangerous terrain, etc. Assuming that they're not careful, of course.

EDIT: A save vs. death magic is its own category on the saving throw matrix - save vs paralyzation, poison, and death magic, I believe. It's kind of like a fortitude save, and is generally one of the easier ones to pass, I believe.

18/00 Strength is inferior to 19. Generally, PCs are limited to 18/00 at best, while really strong monsters (like giants) will have higher ones.

And a round is 1 minute in 2e.

[Matthew]

EP: Wait, which part is wrong then? Is it that 10 sp = 1 ep or that 4 ep = 1 gp? (I'd guess the former).

First Edition: 1,000 CP = 100 SP = 10 EP = 5 GP = 1 PP
Second Edition: 500 CP = 50 SP = 10 EP = 5 GP = 1 PP
OSRIC: 500 CP = 50 SP = 10 EP = 5 GP = 1 PP



- How long does a 2nd ed round last? I know in 1st ed they're supposed to last 1 minute and contain 10 segments or something like that, but I don't know enough about 2nd ed, as per usual.

Same; in second edition they got rid of segments in favour of a more abstract approach. However, in 1995 they published a supplement called Combat & Tactics, which reduced the round length to 12 seconds. Technically, it does not really matter how long a round is, so long as you mark off 1 Turn for every 10 Rounds, or part thereof (this is for the purposes of resting 1 Turn in 6). You can also safely ignore all that if you prefer.



- Is there a difference between 18/00 and 19 STR, and which is the general one to use most often?

A strength of 19 is slightly higher than strength 18/00. It is a bit of a pain to deal with, and OSRIC could not replicate the original progression exactly. One way to deal with it is to separate exceptional strength from the normal progression like so: Strength Charts Discussion (http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=38054&start=30)



- What is a "save vs death magic": a save vs death or a save vs magic?

Save versus Death I would think.



- Just repeating the question on horror checks. I think I'll really need to understand what they are by the time I start this campaign, which admittedly won't be that soon, but still...

Horror checks, etc...: This part is just really confusing me... as much help as possible will be appreciated.

According to my copy of Ravenloft, when a horror check is called for a character rolls a saving throw versus paralysis. If they fail, then the game master rolls 1d6:

1: Aversion (Runs Away, must stay 30' away from scene)
2: Revulsion (As aversion, but cannot even stand the thought of what happened)
3: Obsession (Cannot stop thinking about what happened, over the course of four days sleeplessness imposes a minus 4 penalty to hit)
4: Senseless Rage (Goes beserk, +2 to hit, +2 damage, double attacks, can save to end after three rounds; rage lingers for a month, minus 2 penalty on similar future checks)
5: Mental Shock (Stunned for 3 rounds. Can make a save each round afterwards to end, but if fails three in a row goes into deep shock for an hour, saving each hour to end. Future similar scenes have a minus 2 penalty for a month.
6: Fearstruck (Runs away, may turn and fight if forced; one round to gather wits, minus 2 to hit, 25% chance of spell failure)



Thanks for the help so far!

No worries!

[AllisterH]

Someone answered the Horrors check question.

A Powers check was when the PC(s) intentionally did something evil. The example used in the original boxed set (Realms of Terror) was of a PC locked in a jail to be executed in the morning. Killing the jailer to escape was considered morally grey but not actually a situation for a power check.

Torturing the jailer first though, even to get answers as to why the PC was being charged wrongly, WOULD result in a power check.

Basically, there were six stages of power checks (PCs were supposed to keep track of how often they were subject to a powers check). Each stage had a "reward" from the dark powers of the land (the whole "the land is ALIVE" motif) and a punishment.

The reward was always a mechanical/concrete/rollplaying reward while the punishment was mostly fluff/role-playing up to stage 4.

(For example, at stage 4, a player could gain FLY at will but the punishment would be that the PC would have to roll a saving throw versus spells to resist stealing an item of beauty/power. If unsuccessful, the DM got to run the character until that goal was established.

Conversely, at stage 2, you could get things like Detect Invisibility once a day or Speak with dead once a day as a reward but the punishment was noticeable physical changes such as growing fur/scales.)

Death magic had its own saving throw line (shared by paralyzation and poison) and was used for paralyzation and poison attacks regardless of source and magical attacks (spells and abilties) that would outright kill a character. It could ALSO be used to represent attacks that required great fortitude to resist, basically, it's the 3e equivalent of the FORT roll)

[Ledeas]

unless I am horriably wrong, Stab a Vampire with that Dagger of Vampire slaying, he gets a Save Vs. Death Magic or dies.

Another reason Poisons are named Class A throu whatever is, its easier to say as a player, "I buy 17 doses of a class C posion"

Instead of, "I want Nightshade"
Smart ass in group: "It s a little none fact that there are 17 types of niteshade some not really that deadly"
ect...

[Kurald Galain]

A sword is mentioned as a sword +1, +3 vs. lycanthropes and shape changers that is "treated as a normal weapon against vampires". Does this mean a sword +1 against them, a masterwork sword (are those even in AD&D?), or as a mundane sword?
I would read this as a reminder that vampires aren't considered "lycanthropes and shape changers" (even though they can technically change shape, they're a different class of monster). So the +3 doesn't apply to them, but the +1 does. I believe that's a moot point since vampires require a +2 weapon to be hit, but there you go.

Regardless, it would still be a masterwork sword because all magical items are masterwork. If I recall correctly, masterwork weapons are +1 to hit, +0 to damage; or perhaps it was vice versa.

[Random832]

I would read this as a reminder that vampires aren't considered "lycanthropes and shape changers" (even though they can technically change shape, they're a different class of monster).

Well, no. The "Sword +1, +3 vs. lycanthropes and shape changers" in the DMG is specifically described as working against vampires (and druids). So with that in mind, this note is specifically saying that this sword does not work against vampires. Still an open question on whether it keeps the +1 or not, unless Kurald is correct about +2 being necessary anyway.

[Thelas]

Someone answered the Horrors check question.

A Powers check was when the PC(s) intentionally did something evil. The example used in the original boxed set (Realms of Terror) was of a PC locked in a jail to be executed in the morning. Killing the jailer to escape was considered morally grey but not actually a situation for a power check.

Torturing the jailer first though, even to get answers as to why the PC was being charged wrongly, WOULD result in a power check.

Basically, there were six stages of power checks (PCs were supposed to keep track of how often they were subject to a powers check). Each stage had a "reward" from the dark powers of the land (the whole "the land is ALIVE" motif) and a punishment.

The reward was always a mechanical/concrete/rollplaying reward while the punishment was mostly fluff/role-playing up to stage 4.

(For example, at stage 4, a player could gain FLY at will but the punishment would be that the PC would have to roll a saving throw versus spells to resist stealing an item of beauty/power. If unsuccessful, the DM got to run the character until that goal was established.

Conversely, at stage 2, you could get things like Detect Invisibility once a day or Speak with dead once a day as a reward but the punishment was noticeable physical changes such as growing fur/scales.)

Death magic had its own saving throw line (shared by paralyzation and poison) and was used for paralyzation and poison attacks regardless of source and magical attacks (spells and abilties) that would outright kill a character. It could ALSO be used to represent attacks that required great fortitude to resist, basically, it's the 3e equivalent of the FORT roll)
Okay... here, I'll make something up, can someone tell me if the power level is about right?

Level 1) Detect magic 2/day, minor physical changes
Level 2) Speak with dead 1/day, noticeable physical changes
Level 3) Shadow monsters 3/day, sunlight becomes unpleasant OR wolfsbane affects character as if a werewolf OR something else like that
Level 4) Flight at will, PC must to roll a saving throw versus spells to resist stealing an item of beauty/power. If unsuccessful, the DM got to run the character until that goal was established.
Level 5) Phantasmal killer at will, whenever used, PC must roll a powers check. Roll the save vs spells from level 4 at -2, and must roll a save vs spells at -2 to... I don't know, someone help me find something to go here.
Level 6) Shadow magic at will. Roll the saves vs spells from levels 4 and 5 at -4, and must roll a save vs spells at -4 to leave Ravenloft even if they would normally be able to. In addition, must roll a save vs spells at -4 to resist attacking all seemingly helpless NPCs that actually interact with them.

[AllisterH]

From the Realms of Terror boxed set, here are some of the options possible for reward/punishment for a Horror check.

{Anything with an * was considered to function as a punishment as well)

Stage 1. The Enticement
Reward: +2 HP permanently, +1 to an ability score (max 18), move 15' on all fours*, jumps 2x in height and distance, small claws 1-2 pts of damage*, foul water and food with a touch *, +1 save vs disease OR paralyzation OR poison

Punishment: Yeah, real basic physical changes (eyes glow in the dark, character laughs like a hyena when tense or excited, bays at the moon when first sees it, colorblind, one side of face sags, hair becomes white and tangled.


Stage 2.The Invitation
Reward: Basically double what was in stage 1 and other things like a minor magical item, detect magic/speak with dead/detect invisibility/affect normal fires/chill touch once a day

Punishment: Gross physical change like growing a tail, fingers on left hand become tentacles, hunchback (combat ability unaffected), blinded in normal light, must drink blood once a day, face of a particular animal.


Stage 3: The touch of darkness
Reward: Gain 1 level, warp wood/tasha's hideous laughter/ray of enfeeblement 3 times per day, gains an evil monster of 2 HD as a follower

Punishment: Using the abilities warps the person's body (e.g. if they can warp wood by touch, their hands become gnarly and has curving nails. As well, they automatically gain a vicious temper meaning that they have to roll a saving throw vs spell whenever their desires are thwarted or attack the weakest person for 1 round around them(e.g. in boxed set is a barmaid that refuses to serve the character another drink, if unsuccessful against the saving throw, the character would slap the barmaid which of course would piss off the villagers and friends of the barmaid).

[Thelas]

Those are for horror checks? Do you mean powers checks?
And those are only the first three? Do they get all the listed abilities for each stage or just one?
I'll have to think on what sort of reward would be useful for the second half of the stages then...

Well, thanks. Now I'm impatiently awaiting the day when my players learn to deal with Kobolds properly (as in Kobolds played above INT 4), so that we can move on to AD&D and Ravenloft. *Insert evil DM laugh upon mention of Ravenloft*.

New question:
- What do they actually roll for a powers check? Save vs magic?

Thelas

[Matthew]

I would read this as a reminder that vampires aren't considered "lycanthropes and shape changers" (even though they can technically change shape, they're a different class of monster). So the +3 doesn't apply to them, but the +1 does. I believe that's a moot point since vampires require a +2 weapon to be hit, but there you go.

Regardless, it would still be a masterwork sword because all magical items are masterwork. If I recall correctly, masterwork weapons are +1 to hit, +0 to damage; or perhaps it was vice versa.



Well, no. The "Sword +1, +3 vs. lycanthropes and shape changers" in the DMG is specifically described as working against vampires (and druids). So with that in mind, this note is specifically saying that this sword does not work against vampires. Still an open question on whether it keeps the +1 or not, unless Kurald is correct about +2 being necessary anyway.

The vampires of Ravenloft are more eclectic than the standard Monster Manual version, with different abilities and special defences depending on their age. However, the Monster Manual vampire is vulnerable to +1 weapons.

There is an optional rule in the AD&D DMG for weapon quality, very good quality weapons conferring +1/+0, +0/+1 or +1/+1. Magic weapons do not have to be high quality, but it often makes sense that they are.

[AllisterH]

Those are for horror checks? Do you mean powers checks?

Yep, sorry about that. Those are the results of a failed Powers check.


And those are only the first three? Do they get all the listed abilities for each stage or just one?

Just one. You as DM get to choose for the player (just like magic spells and items, in pre 3e, DM's have a lot more control over the player character abilities)

Those are for horror checks? Do you mean powers checks?

Yep, sorry about that. Those are the results of a failed Powers check.


I'll have to think on what sort of reward would be useful for the second half of the stages then...


Stage 4. The Embrace
Reward: Immune to fire or cold, drain level by touch, control undead at will, magic jar by gaze once a day, invisibilty 3 times per day, need silver or magical weapon to hit the PC, spin webs with hands

Punishment: As mentioned earlier PLUS the physical change corresponds to the reward given (e.g is the sin webs by hand mean that your hands become actual spiders)


Stage 5: Creature of Ravenloft No reward but basically all punishment. The character's mind splits in two basically into a dark and good side and the dark side is controlled by the DM for 2d6 days. The boxed set isn't exactly clear as to what triggers the change, but my impression is that it is a consequence of failing the save vs spell from stage 4.

Don't really need to worry about statting out Stage 6 since at that point, the PC permanently becomes a Darklord and the player has to give their character sheet to the DM.



New question:
- What do they actually roll for a powers check? Save vs magic?

Thelas

It's a percentile roll (roll 1d100 or 2d10- one to represent tens, the other to represent units). A roll of 100 means that the powers of the land notice you. As a DM, you can increase the chance to up to 10% depending on how horrific the act was that the PCs did but it recommends that it should never be more than 10% for PC.

[AllisterH]

There is an optional rule in the AD&D DMG for weapon quality, very good quality weapons conferring +1/+0, +0/+1 or +1/+1. Magic weapons do not have to be high quality, but it often makes sense that they are.

Slight correction. It was either +1 to hit or +1 to damage. Never both and it depended on the type of weapon.

However, this optional system didn't apply to actual magical weapons. I don't think ther tem masterwork even appeared in DnD until the player's option series.

[Matthew]

Slight correction. It was either +1 to hit or +1 to damage. Never both and it depended on the type of weapon.

However, this optional system didn't apply to actual magical weapons. I don't think the term masterwork even appeared in DnD until the player's option series.
The DMG actually does not forbid exceptional weapons of +1/+1 type; in fact it suggests that +1/+0 are well balanced and +0/+1 weapons are well honed. There is no reason that such qualities could not be combined, and when the rules were further formalised in the Complete Fighter's Handbook it was spelled out that the highest quality weapons were indeed +1/+1.

Whether or not (and quite how) such rules might be incorporated into the function of magical weapons is not addressed, but one would expect that most were well balanced and honed.

[Thelas]

1% chance? Seriously? (thinks...) Actually, that's a good thing, since they kind of want to not roll the 1% chance.
Though if I don't explain it's a bad thing and one of them gets lucky and rolls it, I give them a +1 to a stat and a very minor disadvantage, maybe the players will start WANTING Ravenloft powers... *insert another Evil DM laugh here*

[Thelas]

And are fear checks just saves vs. spells or feared (and immunity doesn't help), or something slightly more confusing?

[Ledeas]

And are fear checks just saves vs. spells or feared (and immunity doesn't help), or something slightly more confusing?

usually with 2nd edition if something creates a fear check it is a savings throw versus a specific saving throws.

The dragon fear is save vs. Petrification.

If it is generated by a spell, use Save vs. Spell..

of course you can pick anything you want.

[AllisterH]

And are fear checks just saves vs. spells or feared (and immunity doesn't help), or something slightly more confusing?

In the context of Ravenloft, a fear check is a saving throw vs paralyzation. A Horror check is the same saving throw.

Fear vs Horror check.

A fear check is to be used against active threats that overwhelm the party/character. For example, if the PCs face a threat that has more than double the HD of the entire party, it calls for a Fear check. Another example given is if the threat can one-shot the hardiest adventurer in the party (a.k.a do enough HP damage to the PC with the max hp at full health)

Horror check is to be used for scenes that the PCs would feel revulsion from. Example from the boxed set was witnessing a fair young maiden take off her clothes to take a dip into the pond (obviously not horrific) and THEN witnessing the maiden take off her head before sliding into the water. (call for a Horror check)

Needless to say, both are more likely to occur at lower levels. As a PC levels, there less likely to be in situations where a fear check is appropriate (not many monsters I can think of that have the double the HD of a 10th level 5 person party in 2e) and horror checks are similarly less common (seeing their first victim of a werewolf mauling at 1st level might be an appropriate situation for a Horror check but by 10th? )

Both are recommended to be used sparingly and basically, the module itself should tell you when a fear or horror check is appropriate.

[Thelas]

And do fear checks also use the same table as horror checks?
Man, after this I really want a copy of the Ravenloft books so I don't have to keep asking these questions on the forae...

What's the general attitude towards character death in Ravenloft? I assume it's a "kill 'em if they deserved it" type of game because after all it's a horror setting, not just a "you see a kobold. you walk up to it. you kill it really easily and get free XP" setting. Also, I know that earlier one player threatened to leave (which wouldn't be great, I only have 3 players at the moment) because his character died. Being as I was basically using this to let them know I played kobolds smart and it was the first encounter I did the old "It's all a dream" trick, and gave him back his character, but... (Maybe I shouldn't be such a big fan of CdGs?) Any advice to not getting him TOO cranky about PC death without spoiling the Ravenloft mood?

[AllisterH]

And do fear checks also use the same table as horror checks?

Nah, best way to treat it is as it the player was struck by the FEAR spell (there _ARE_ minor differences but really, at the table, it was alwas easier just to use the spell description as there isn't that much difference)


Man, after this I really want a copy of the Ravenloft books so I don't have to keep asking these questions on the forae...

What's the general attitude towards character death in Ravenloft? I assume it's a "kill 'em if they deserved it" type of game because after all it's a horror setting, not just a "you see a kobold. you walk up to it. you kill it really easily and get free XP" setting. Also, I know that earlier one player threatened to leave (which wouldn't be great, I only have 3 players at the moment) because his character died. Being as I was basically using this to let them know I played kobolds smart and it was the first encounter I did the old "It's all a dream" trick, and gave him back his character, but... (Maybe I shouldn't be such a big fan of CdGs?) Any advice to not getting him TOO cranky about PC death without spoiling the Ravenloft mood?

Ravenloft is Gothic horror....supposed to be different than your standard slasher flick horror or Lovecraftian horror.

Personally, I wouldn't run Raenloft nowadays...It's much harder to sell the Gothic horror of Ravenloft..the thing is, part of the appeal of Ravenloft was supposed to be the seduction and the temptation of doing evil things (kind of why Lord Soth and Strahd are perfect examples of darklords).

As well, most of the gamers during Ravenloft's heyday in the early 90s were children of the 80s and as weird as it sounds, it was much easier to scare players back then as there wasn't as mch horror material available (much harder to get into a R-rated film back then). Furthermore, there's no things like SAW or the DEadspace/Left 4 dead/Resident Evil set of games.

Even for new players to D&D, it would be a hard sell due to the media available.

[Thelas]

I personally find that sort of stuff more interesting than Lovecraft, and that's why I said "kill 'em if they deserved it", not "kill 'em all every 0.5 seconds". Though I probably should have amended "and make sure they have a nice amount of seasoning (in the form of terror) before they die".
I'm giving Ravenloft a try, and after one module, if they don't like it, well the mists might be in a good mood and release them from our favorite demiplane.
Hopefully I can get it working... and if it doesn't at the very worst the conscious continuous effort to describe EVERYTHING will probably end up making me a better DM.

[Matthew]

We typically played it more like a Hammer Horror, so that it was not so much about the fear factor, but more about the style and tropes of the genre.

[Thelas]

Has anyone played the Ravenloft set of six modules (including the one I mentioned earlier)? The Fraternity of Shadows FAQ gives a specific order they recommend following for the modules (4, 3, 1, 2, 5, 6).
Can someone please check this text for the prophecy and make sure that I reordered it correctly? Specifically, I might have the last two verses out of order.

NOTE: IF YOU ARE GOING TO PLAY THESE MODULES, AND/OR ARE IN MY GROUP AND DISOBEYED THE NOTE IN THE TITLE, DON'T OPEN THE SPOILER.

The night of evil shall descend on the land
When this hexad of signs is near at hand.

The light of the sky shining over the dead
Shall gutter and fail, turning all to red.

Seventh time the son of suns doth rise
To send the knave an eternity of cries.

In the house of Daegon the sorcerer born
Through life, unlife, unliving shall scorn.

The lifeless child of stern mother found
Heralds a time, a night of evil unbound.

Inajira will his fortunes reverse
And all shall live with dreaded curse.


--- (hyskosa scroll in NotWD ends here. full version continues) ---

The bodiless journey to time before
Where happiness to hate makes land of lore.

[Thelas]

For those of you who know more Ravenloft: Will slaughtering innocent villagers (TN) who attacked you first under a mistaken impression that you murdered someone force a powers check?

[hamlet]

Well, no. The "Sword +1, +3 vs. lycanthropes and shape changers" in the DMG is specifically described as working against vampires (and druids). So with that in mind, this note is specifically saying that this sword does not work against vampires. Still an open question on whether it keeps the +1 or not, unless Kurald is correct about +2 being necessary anyway.

Yes, I know the module that the OP is talking about, and that specific sword does not work against vampires. After all, it's found in the lair of a particularly intelligent and savvy vampire. It's a rather clever trap that careless PC's are likely to fall into if they do as PC's most often do, leap before they look.

As I haven't seen the question answered here yet, and I think it a very important one for the module, I'll put it here:

A "goblin" is NOT the same as a "goblyn." A goblin (with an "i") is the typical 1st level moster that dies after a sturdy kick in the crotch by the fighter.

A goblyn (with a "y"), on the other hand, is something the group I'm a player in has taken to calling "head biters." They're a particularly nasty humanoid from the Ravenloft setting and feature prominently in this module and one other. There should be a description of them in the module, though it's possible WOTC left them out (evil coastal wizards!). They're four or five hit dice, moderately magic resistant (just enough to ruin the wizard's day) and, if they can get both their hands on you, will take great pleasure in chewing your face off and eating the tender juicy filling of your skull.

I highly recommend that you spring the couple of bucks it'll take on E-Bay or Amazon or whatever to get an actuall copy of this module. The innards of it were not well transcribed by WOTC and things are very confusing. The original, while not particularly well laid out, is much clearer and worth the coin. If you're planning on continuing in the same vein of Ravenloft, then I'll also recommend you a module called Castles Forlorn. I don't have much info on the behind the scenes parts yet since I'm a player in it still, but I can tell you that in the hands of a careful and methodical DM, it's one hell of an adventure. Time travel, cursed lands, hordes of goblyns, a giant undead sea serpent, just all kinds of fun. I must warn you, though, that if you're looking for a straight up knock down fight, you and your players will go insane with this module. Literally.

As for AD&D/OSRIC, my advice is to take it slow. Don't let things overwhelm you as this and many other modules are complex and difficult to deal with. Don't be afraid to call a halt for a minute or two while you figure something out. If the players ask a question that you don't know the answer to immediately, tell the player to hold on a second while you open the book and look it up. Once you get used to things, the only thing you'll be looking up is the info in the module about the backstory (which is a bit complicated here).

Another bit of advice if you haven't started yet, take the module you're talking about, get yourself a copy of Castles Forlorn, and crame them together. Just slice off the first bit of the Feast about how things start out, in fact the entire first third of the module really, and all of the sudden, you're left with the realization that the main artifact/macguffin opens up worlds of possibilities in the larger module. Just have the bad girl steal it from the titular castles. Castles Forlorn makes a great superstructure to jam other modules into as side-quests, or simply as diversions when the main action gets too intense for the hapless victims, a way to get folks out of the cursed and evil area and into a place where they can mentally recupperate by beating up on weaker things.

As for the mists of Ravenloft shtick, I recommend it be dropped. It's really heavy handed and doesn't add a whole lot to the game, IMO, though you can use it now and then if you need to smack them around a bit.

[hamlet]

For those of you who know more Ravenloft: Will slaughtering innocent villagers (TN) who attacked you first under a mistaken impression that you murdered someone force a powers check?

Depends. If it's actual self defence, then probably not, though it might leave them open to future corruption. If the villagers pose no real threat, or the players (not characters, the PLAYERS) seem to enjoy it too much, then yeah, probably.

[Lapak]

Though if I don't explain it's a bad thing and one of them gets lucky and rolls it, I give them a +1 to a stat and a very minor disadvantage, maybe the players will start WANTING Ravenloft powers... *insert another Evil DM laugh here*That is exactly the point. DON'T go warning them that it's a bad thing if they can't figure out for themselves that "hey, I threw a child at the vampire in order to escape, and now I can see in the dark!" is a bad thing. The Demiplane of Dread wants the powers it grants to be attractive until the person getting them in well and truly on the road to Hell.

More than any other D&D setting, Ravenloft is supposed to be about that kind of choice; the horror of the setting comes from the fact that evil is in control. Evil is more powerful than the heroes. If the heroes were evil, frankly, things would get a lot easier for them - as an extreme example, Paladins in the land are screwed with a capital SCREW, as darklords automatically become aware of them and can determine their general location from the moment they enter a domain to the moment they leave it. A party of all assassins and dark wizards might well be the most successful at actually resisting a darklord, because they blend in with the background and their power will be augmented rather than resisted, but they run a real risk of becoming the thing they fight against.

[Bagelz]

How do you run combats with 180 skellies or ridiculous numbers like that? I definitely don't have that many minis, that's for sure.

goto your local dollar store and buy a bag of plastic army men. they may be a little large compared to minis but they work for placement.

[hamlet]

goto your local dollar store and buy a bag of plastic army men. they may be a little large compared to minis but they work for placement.

You don't even need to do that. Just decide how many skeletons can surround each PC and go from there.

Plus, in that particular instance, the players will have to be tremendously stupid to turn that into a brute force combat and should be punished accordingly.

Plus, it's more along the lines of 1800 skeletons, or perhaps even more than that.

[Foryn Gilnith]

Plus, in that particular instance, the players will have to be tremendously stupid to turn that into a brute force combat and should be punished accordingly

Damage Reduction, High AC, and/or automatic healing?

[AllisterH]

You don't even need to do that. Just decide how many skeletons can surround each PC and go from there.

Plus, in that particular instance, the players will have to be tremendously stupid to turn that into a brute force combat and should be punished accordingly.

Plus, it's more along the lines of 1800 skeletons, or perhaps even more than that.

Depends on the armour though the party has....

If it's a heavy cleric/fighter party, it might actually be possible to tank that so to speak due to the THACO of skeetons compared to magical full plate.

[hamlet]

Damage Reduction, High AC, and/or automatic healing?

Second Edition, remember.


Depends on the armour though the party has....

If it's a heavy cleric/fighter party, it might actually be possible to tank that so to speak due to the THACO of skeetons compared to magical full plate.

Yes, it's possible if your party is high enough in level, clever enough, or if the DM just decides to handwave it away. We managed to solve the problem by having a cleric who was high enough in level to outright destroy skeletons by turning take several days carefully turning them in groups while the rest of the party fended off the rest. It took close to a week and we still got nicked up here and there.

The point of the encounter is that it can't (or shouldn't) be handled as a set piece battle. It's much more of a puzzle instead.

[Thelas]

I'm actually not running Feast of Goblyns first, only because when I was browsing the wiki article for Ravenloft and they linked to a site that recommends doing the Grand Conjunction modules in a different order to use them as a campaign (http://www.fraternityofshadows.com/FAQs.html).
Any tips for convincing the players that "don't worry, it's not THAT bad, throwing the helpless baby at the zombies to let you escape without fighting" (or any sort of similar type of luring them into evil, since that's the point of Ravenloft if I get it... corrupting the PCs slowly... *insert another one of those evil DM laughs here*)?

[Lapak]

Any tips for convincing the players that "don't worry, it's not THAT bad, throwing the helpless baby at the zombies to let you escape without fighting" (or any sort of similar type of luring them into evil, since that's the point of Ravenloft if I get it... corrupting the PCs slowly... *insert another one of those evil DM laughs here*)?It's not so much 'corrupt your players ASAP, screw them over if they avoid it.' The idea is to give them a choice: victory over darkness through fighting fire with fire is one road, taking what limited success they can get is another. Every so often, provide them with both options.

For example: the players are checking out a rumor of lycanthropic slayings in city near a haunted forest. Some investigation reveals that a band of werewolves in the forest is responsible, and the PCs roll out to stop them. They fight a couple of battles, they thrash some of the lower-level wolves and maybe a lieutenant, but it turns out that was a holding action: when they arrive at the werewolves' lair the next day the boss and a fair number of the wolves have cleared out. Questioning one of the wolves left behind to ambush them, they find that the others have headed out for parts unknown and will undoubtedly resume their wicked activities in some other town soon.

Now, at some point in their investigation of the forest, they gained hints that there was power here and found an ancient scroll somewhere along the line. The scroll describes a ritual that can be enacted at an altar in the center of the forest (as it happens, that's one of the few landmarks in the woods and the wolves set up their lair around it.) Sacrifice someone on the altar and chant the words on the scroll, and the spirits of the forest will rise up and slaughter every sentient living being in the woods who wasn't part of the ritual.

The players can either:
- take the victory they have, knowing full well that they barely even made a dent in the werewolves but at least THIS town is safe, or
- enact a dark ritual, sacrificing the surrendered werewolf to power it and probably killing several innocent townsfolk (as they know that there are hunters in town whose livelihood depends on them being in the woods during the day.) That would end the threat, give them more XP for doing so, and would most definitely require a Powers check at around 5% (dark ritual powered by sacrifice and hate, death of innocents.)

[Thelas]

First off, thank you for the example.
Secondly, I wasn't saying that I was going to screw them over if they didn't commit evil acts, but just asking for stuff like the example you gave...
As a DM, I want to tell a story. As Ravenloft (the land itself is sentient, right?), I want to corrupt them. I guess the question should have been better stated.
Thirdly, the movement values given in AD&D are for what period of time? Is AD&D scale 1"=5ft like usual?
Fourthly, more stuff like that last post from anyone?

[Lapak]

First off, thank you for the example.
Secondly, I wasn't saying that I was going to screw them over if they didn't commit evil acts, but just asking for stuff like the example you gave...
As a DM, I want to tell a story. As Ravenloft (the land itself is sentient, right?), I want to corrupt them. I guess the question should have been better stated.
Excellent! Sounds like you're on the right track. One more word of advice: don't go overboard or it loses the effect. Maybe 1 adventure in 3 or 4 should have a semi-obvious corrupting element in it, or it starts to wear on the group and becomes much less dramatic. Since it's Ravenloft, of course, that means that the other times a limited victory is the best they're going to get: to take the example I gave, just remove the scroll/altar bit. They drove off the werewolves, even if they're still out there.

That's what makes the ritual genuinely tempting: after a dozen sessions, the players and characters both are hungry for more than a half-victory. Truly noble characters will still resist the impulse, and morally gray characters will find themselves getting a little darker.

[Random832]

Thirdly, the movement values given in AD&D are for what period of time? Is AD&D scale 1"=5ft like usual?

The (2nd edition - i have no clue about first edition and "inches") AD&D movement value (i.e. 12-ish for a normal human, right?) is walking speed in tens of yards per round outdoors, or tens of feet per round in a dungeon where you have to walk carefully (a round is one minute, and the amount you can move in combat is some fraction of this)

See http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4alum/2009June

[Thelas]

What I have is 120 ft / round for movement (though I'm using OSRIC)... oh, right. 'If a character is moving cautiously, this movement rate is divided by 10.'
Thanks.

I would now say that you guys were evil with that sort of 'only let the players win by giving into the darkness, and even then only some sessions...', except that I like that idea and think it'll be interesting to see what they do.

[hamlet]

It's not so much 'corrupt your players ASAP, screw them over if they avoid it.' The idea is to give them a choice: victory over darkness through fighting fire with fire is one road, taking what limited success they can get is another. Every so often, provide them with both options.

For example: the players are checking out a rumor of lycanthropic slayings in city near a haunted forest. Some investigation reveals that a band of werewolves in the forest is responsible, and the PCs roll out to stop them. They fight a couple of battles, they thrash some of the lower-level wolves and maybe a lieutenant, but it turns out that was a holding action: when they arrive at the werewolves' lair the next day the boss and a fair number of the wolves have cleared out. Questioning one of the wolves left behind to ambush them, they find that the others have headed out for parts unknown and will undoubtedly resume their wicked activities in some other town soon.

Now, at some point in their investigation of the forest, they gained hints that there was power here and found an ancient scroll somewhere along the line. The scroll describes a ritual that can be enacted at an altar in the center of the forest (as it happens, that's one of the few landmarks in the woods and the wolves set up their lair around it.) Sacrifice someone on the altar and chant the words on the scroll, and the spirits of the forest will rise up and slaughter every sentient living being in the woods who wasn't part of the ritual.

The players can either:
- take the victory they have, knowing full well that they barely even made a dent in the werewolves but at least THIS town is safe, or
- enact a dark ritual, sacrificing the surrendered werewolf to power it and probably killing several innocent townsfolk (as they know that there are hunters in town whose livelihood depends on them being in the woods during the day.) That would end the threat, give them more XP for doing so, and would most definitely require a Powers check at around 5% (dark ritual powered by sacrifice and hate, death of innocents.)

Actually, I'd raise that to about 10% since it's a blatantly evil act, even if they had good intentions. That's, to me, a lot of what Ravenloft power checks were about. It's not about corrupting the characters/players, it's about putting that really tough choice in front of them when they're most vulnerable. Example: they've managed to ambush the evil vampire that they've been chasing at long last in the city graveyard and the fight ensues leading to the vampire being forced incorporeal and retreating - the noise of combat has attracted the guards who only see a bunch of armed strangers running around the graveyard and, in order to pursue the vampire and finally end it, they'll have to plow through at least half a dozen guards, killing several of them. Make your choice.

EDIT: It's also not about "not letting them win" but about making victory a real struggle in a real way. The simplest way to do this is to play the villain monsters with an appropriate level of intelligence half the time. Once the players start to get frustrated that the monsters don't just stand there and die politely, offer them a genuine shortcut and cackle madly as they fall all over themselves to get it.

[Lapak]

Actually, I'd raise that to about 10% since it's a blatantly evil act, even if they had good intentions. That's, to me, a lot of what Ravenloft power checks were about. Yeah, but the base is at 1%. Since 10% is the max, I'd save that for blatantly evil acts with evil intentions. The Dark Powers don't respond to every petty criminal, after all.
It's not about corrupting the characters/players, it's about putting that really tough choice in front of them when they're most vulnerable. Example: they've managed to ambush the evil vampire that they've been chasing at long last in the city graveyard and the fight ensues leading to the vampire being forced incorporeal and retreating - the noise of combat has attracted the guards who only see a bunch of armed strangers running around the graveyard and, in order to pursue the vampire and finally end it, they'll have to plow through at least half a dozen guards, killing several of them. Make your choice.

EDIT: It's also not about "not letting them win" but about making victory a real struggle in a real way. The simplest way to do this is to play the villain monsters with an appropriate level of intelligence half the time. Once the players start to get frustrated that the monsters don't just stand there and die politely, offer them a genuine shortcut and cackle madly as they fall all over themselves to get it.Yep.

Another option: give them something they feel that they can control. From one of the villains, they defeat, they find a rod that can raise up to 5 humanoid corpses as advanced zombies once per day. The zombies are unintelligent, immune to both turning and rebuking, and viciously attack the closest creatures to them until they are destroyed. A very clever party facing a dangerous threat might find ways to make that work: they ambush a necromancer at work and give him a taste of his own medicine, or raise a group of the BBEG's minions that surround him to give him something to deal with. The zombies fight the bad guy, one side wins but gets torn up in the process, and the players can easily mop up the winning side. If they're in an isolated location with no innocents, they will have no trouble keeping the zombies handy for destruction. There's no soul-binding or anything involved, just mindless undead that serve as a fire-and-forget. Everyone wins!

Use of this item, obviously, requires a Powers check every time for meddling with evil necromantic energies, and because whether they think they can handle the results or not they are creating mindless, ravenous, destructive undead horrors.

EDIT again: And I really should underline that a minor victory should still feel like a victory. They ARE protecting a town by driving werewolves off, in the first example. The PCs should absolutely win a lot of the time - they are the heroes, and no one feels heroic if you're always losing. But the victory should be tempered somehow most of the time, by a moral cost like we've talked about or through the knowledge that the threat was only mitigated, not eliminated, or some such factor.

[Thelas]

Would that just be a 1% or 2% powers check (for the rod)? Or is undead creation more like 4-5%? I'd guess about 2% seems right.

Should I inform them of power checks or just roll them behind the screen until at least one PC is at least at stage one?

Where does the name Ravenloft come from? (Just curious.)

And how about, say... a staff that saps at the very life force of its target (2 levels drained?) on a failed save (what type of save would that be again?) and that creates a 2 HD zombie, as yours, if they failed their save?
(Power check 1-3% on each use (whichever you guys think seems right, I guess)).

[Thane of Fife]

Where does the name Ravenloft come from? (Just curious.)


Strahd's castle is called Castle Ravenloft. As Strahd was the first Darklord (I believe), and the first module in the setting involved exploring his castle, the setting was named after it.

[Thelas]

^ Other questions from above, plus
a) After converting our group's 3.5 sorcerer into a 1.0 magic user, something struck me. How do I keep him from dying until second level? I'd prefer to minimize number of char deaths, because new characters sort of break immersion.
b) Any tips for getting the players more likely to not reject Ravenloft... (and to think one of them called me an 'Evil DM' for using such tactics as surprise rounds, focused fire, and flanking (in 3.5)) as soon as they see they aren't going to just slaughter stuff? I'd say that most of our group will adapt well to Ravenloft, but there's one player I'm a bit worried about (the m-u's player, that is), and a few new players, one with zero D&D experience and one more 3.5er, just like me and the rest of the group. (Though I've seen more AD&D than 3.5 recently...)
c) Is there like a combat flowchart or something for 2nd edition?

(First Ravenloft/AD&D session is Friday, I'm already worried I'll mess up somehow and read a paragraph of the DM-only text to the PCs or something stupid like that. Save my sanity, keep posting so that I don't think about all the mistakes I could make...)

[Lapak]

^ Other questions from above, plus
a) After converting our group's 3.5 sorcerer into a 1.0 magic user, something struck me. How do I keep him from dying until second level? I'd prefer to minimize number of char deaths, because new characters sort of break immersion.1e level 1 mages are fragile with a capital F. The other characters are going to need to really focus on protecting him, the party should not be afraid to run if they're in trouble at all, and IIRC he can get darts to chuck after his one spell.

b) Any tips for getting the players more likely to not reject Ravenloft... (and to think one of them called me an 'Evil DM' for using such tactics as surprise rounds, focused fire, and flanking (in 3.5)) as soon as they see they aren't going to just slaughter stuff? I'd say that most of our group will adapt well to Ravenloft, but there's one player I'm a bit worried about (the m-u's player, that is), and a few new players, one with zero D&D experience and one more 3.5er, just like me and the rest of the group. (Though I've seen more AD&D than 3.5 recently...)To be blunt, I'd make sure that your group is interested in this kind of game before you start it. RPGs are a collaborative project, and if they're not going to have fun with it it's not going to go far. Basically, give them input. Make sure that they do have some say in what kinds of adventures they pursue. What victories they do get, let them have it and let them enjoy it and above all don't undo it. If they save a town, let it be saved for a bit. And if they aren't enjoying themselves, well, Ravenloft is known to let (non-darklord) people go at random.

c) Is there like a combat flowchart or something for 2nd edition?

(First Ravenloft/AD&D session is Friday, I'm already worried I'll mess up somehow and read a paragraph of the DM-only text to the PCs or something stupid like that. Save my sanity, keep posting so that I don't think about all the mistakes I could make...)I suspect you'll do just fine.

[Thelas]

AD&D XP is still split among the whole party, right? Because if so... "5 xp + 1 per hp" will not get them levels for quite a while.

How does surprise work in AD&D 2nd ed? Is it at all like 1st ed?

The module won't break if I just end up using 1st ed combat instead of 2nd ed, right?

[AllisterH]

AD&D XP is still split among the whole party, right? Because if so... "5 xp + 1 per hp" will not get them levels for quite a while.

You know how we're saying 2e is basically 1e (kind of like the difference between 3.0 and 3.5, in fact, less than that IMO)? Well, this is perhaps the biggest difference between 1e and 2e.

1e has the rule where 1 gp found = 1 xp AND you can sell magic items for gp which directly correspond to xp. Basically, when the designers of 2e did the xp chart, they kinda forgot that Gygax in 1e intended for the BULK of the xp to come from TREASURE and not MONSTER-KILLING. Needless to say, they didn't compensate for this by increasing significantly the xp of monsters.

Secondly, there were two other 1e tricks/rules that helped low level characters survive.

Firstly, the rules for hirelings/followers/henchmen were shall we say, more open to abuse in 1st edition. You could employ henchmen/hirelings and basically use them as well, meat shields to put it bluntly, on your adventures. This _WAS_ a valid way to survive the early levels as you could use them to scout out ahead and also act as man of arms in adventures.

The 2nd edition version EXPLICITLY put the kibosh on that by stating that hirelings/followers couldn't come on party adventures AND that henchmen were under the DM's control (in 1e, the player could look for henchmen but in 2e, it became a DM-only perk).

Secondly, there was the trick of using armoured war dogs. Armoured war dogs were cheap and kind of like the 3e druid companion, were more than a match for a typical 1 or 2HD monster.

Thus, in 1e, a party of 5 would in may cases actually consist of upwards of 10 combatants on the PC side (yet those combatants didn't take any of the xp away from the party - even a henchman was only entitled to a 50% share and the 1e PHB recommended against it if the player was directing the henchmen a lot)

2e, by nixing those tricks, ironically became more lethal than it should've been IMO.

Finally, it should be noted that in 1e, you weren't exactly expected to even name your PC until 3rd level BECAUSE of that lethality. 1e IMO was more of an exercise to show off the PLAYER's skill in using the rules to beat the DM.

While 2e is rightly hailed as the edition where it became more than hack and slash, its rule system actually encouraged it even more (and Ravenloft is a prime example of that dichotomy between role-playing and roll-playing).



How does surprise work in AD&D 2nd ed? Is it at all like 1st ed?

No, but use the 2e system. 1e's surprise rules were akin to the unarmed combat table from 1e, a.k.a way more convoluted than it needed to be IMO.


The module won't break if I just end up using 1st ed combat instead of 2nd ed, right?

If you understand the rules of the 1e combat system, then nope, it won't break.

[Thelas]

Okay.... Thanks for your explanations, but I'm currently reading the 1e spell list and...
Heal [Reversible]
Clerical Necromany

Does it force a powers check? It's technically necromancy that manipulates life force, but it doesn't feel right.
Would you recommend using 1e xp since I only have OSRIC, and the numbers in it are pretty big... even a fighter needs 1900 xp for 2nd level.
And what are 2e surprise rules? Like 3e?

[Matthew]

You know how we're saying 2e is basically 1e (kind of like the difference between 3.0 and 3.5, in fact, less than that IMO)? Well, this is perhaps the biggest difference between 1e and 2e.

1e has the rule where 1 gp found = 1 xp AND you can sell magic items for gp which directly correspond to xp. Basically, when the designers of 2e did the xp chart, they kinda forgot that Gygax in 1e intended for the BULK of the xp to come from TREASURE and not MONSTER-KILLING. Needless to say, they didn't compensate for this by increasing significantly the xp of monsters.

Hmmn. The second edition rules for experience points were just more open to interpretation than in the first edition. Basically, the game master was left to set the criteria, which could be identical to that set in first edition. However, it is true that in many cases the experience point value of creatures was greatly inflated in second edition, with little rhyme or reason.



Secondly, there were two other 1e tricks/rules that helped low level characters survive.

Firstly, the rules for hirelings/followers/henchmen were shall we say, more open to abuse in 1st edition. You could employ henchmen/hirelings and basically use them as well, meat shields to put it bluntly, on your adventures. This _WAS_ a valid way to survive the early levels as you could use them to scout out ahead and also act as man of arms in adventures.

The 2nd edition version EXPLICITLY put the kibosh on that by stating that hirelings/followers couldn't come on party adventures AND that henchmen were under the DM's control (in 1e, the player could look for henchmen but in 2e, it became a DM-only perk).

I am not at all sure this is correct. From what I can see in the second edition books, henchmen can come under the control of players, which is the same as first edition, and no rule prevents hirelings from accompanying characters into the dungeon. I would be very interested to read such a rule, however!



Secondly, there was the trick of using armoured war dogs. Armoured war dogs were cheap and kind of like the 3e druid companion, were more than a match for a typical 1 or 2HD monster.

Armoured war dogs? Nay, that sounds like a house rule! You could buy war dogs in either version of the rules, however.

[Thane of Fife]

1e has the rule where 1 gp found = 1 xp AND you can sell magic items for gp which directly correspond to xp. Basically, when the designers of 2e did the xp chart, they kinda forgot that Gygax in 1e intended for the BULK of the xp to come from TREASURE and not MONSTER-KILLING. Needless to say, they didn't compensate for this by increasing significantly the xp of monsters.

Just as a commentary, the introduction to the Encyclopedia Magica actually asserts that xp for treasure was removed because players were complaining that characters levelled too quickly. Whether that's true or merely an ex post facto explanation is questionable.


I am not at all sure this is correct. From what I can see in the second edition books, henchmen can come under the control of players, which is the same as first edition, and no rule prevents hirelings from accompanying characters into the dungeon. I would be very interested to read such a rule, however!

While not a hard-and-fast rule, per se, but the PHB states that "[Hirelings] often refuse to accompany a PC on an adventure. Even a hireling who regularly undertakes dangerous missions normally refuses to join player character parties"

And later, on followers, "More reliable than those who are motivated purely by money...." and "They also do not accompany the player characters on group adventures." (Look on pages 114-115).

[Matthew]

a) After converting our group's 3.5 sorcerer into a 1.0 magic user, something struck me. How do I keep him from dying until second level? I'd prefer to minimize number of char deaths, because new characters sort of break immersion.

Really, that is the player's job. It is a problem with Ravenloft, however, since introducing characters usually means via the mists. The best way to keep the magician alive is to let him hire a bodyguard and have the player control that character, that way the player is less inclined to "risk his artillery" just in order to have something to do at the table.



b) Any tips for getting the players more likely to not reject Ravenloft... (and to think one of them called me an 'Evil DM' for using such tactics as surprise rounds, focused fire, and flanking (in 3.5) as soon as they see they aren't going to just slaughter stuff? I'd say that most of our group will adapt well to Ravenloft, but there's one player I'm a bit worried about (the m-u's player, that is), and a few new players, one with zero D&D experience and one more 3.5er, just like me and the rest of the group. (Though I've seen more AD&D than 3.5 recently...)

Plenty of role-play and intrigue; some way to get the players invested in the setting is desirable, perhaps a reward to obtain or mystery to solve. If they are not really into the setting to begin with it could be a hard sell.



c) Is there like a combat flowchart or something for 2nd edition?

The general idea is:

1) Declare Actions
2) Roll Initiative
3) Resolve Actions

Are you looking for something more complicated?



Okay.... Thanks for your explanations, but I'm currently reading the 1e spell list and...
Heal [Reversible]
Clerical Necromancy

Does it force a powers check? It's technically necromancy that manipulates life force, but it doesn't feel right.

Probably not.



Would you recommend using 1e xp since I only have OSRIC, and the numbers in it are pretty big... even a fighter needs 1900 xp for 2nd level.

Depends how quickly you want to advance levels. Awarding experience for something tangible that is not "killing monsters" is a good way to go, though.



And what are 2e surprise rules? Like 3e?

Each side has a chance of surprising the other, typically 3 in 10, but it can be modified by the situation. If neither or both sides are surprised, nothing happens. If one side is surprised the other gets a free round of action against it. In the case of a successful ambush, there is a a free round of action followed by a surprise roll.



While not a hard-and-fast rule, per se, but the PHB states that "[Hirelings] often refuse to accompany a PC on an adventure. Even a hireling who regularly undertakes dangerous missions normally refuses to join player character parties."

That sounds pretty much the same as first edition to me. Getting hirelings to accompany adventurers requires a heavy incentive and those willing to work day-to-day a few, far between, and desperate.



And later, on followers, "More reliable than those who are motivated purely by money...." and "They also do not accompany the player characters on group adventures." (Look on pages 114-115).

Heh; so they accompany player characters only on on-on-one adventures? Still, not particularly surprising for fighter followers, but a reasonable line to draw between thief/ranger followers and their henchmen.

[AllisterH]

Hmmn. The second edition rules for experience points were just more open to interpretation than in the first edition. Basically, the game master was left to set the criteria, which could be identical to that set in first edition. However, it is true that in many cases the experience point value of creatures was greatly inflated in second edition, with little rhyme or reason.

Not really I found. The 1e rules had the 1gp = 1xp rule and the selling of treasure for xp rule clearly stated in both the DMG and PHB for 1st edition. There's no mention of this rule in any of the 2e PHB/DMG books.

Most monsters in 2e didn't get enough of a XP boost IMO to compensate for the loss that treasure brought and that's why 2e's xp glacial xp rate is an abnormality.


I am not at all sure this is correct. From what I can see in the second edition books, henchmen can come under the control of players, which is the same as first edition, and no rule prevents hirelings from accompanying characters into the dungeon. I would be very interested to read such a rule, however!

Black cover PHB 2e page 151 2nd paragraph. Yeah...it even mentions that yes, a hireling such as a foot soldier can be used to man a wall but they will NOT accompany the player on an adventure.

Similarly, compare and contrast the rules for henchmen between the two editions. The 2nd edition version has way more restrictions and also you can't simply go to the local pub and get a henchman a la the 1e version.

For us, the 1e version was basically a way for a player to control two characters whereas the 2e version of the henchmen rules made it quite clear that it was a NPC under the control of the DM who just lent it out for a time.

Pg 153 (black cover PHB, 3rd paragraph, last line): "The DM at any time can dictate the actions of the henchman, since the character is still a NPC.



Armoured war dogs? Nay, that sounds like a house rule! You could buy war dogs in either version of the rules, however.

That might've been a 1e house rule or more likely an interpretation since there was nothing in the books I remember that said you couldn't get barding for your war dog.:smallsmile:

re: HEAL

Definitely wouldn't call for a powers check, not even the REVERSE version of it would trigger a powers check, but it does remind me of something and another reason why you would want to pick up from ebay the Ravenloft boxed set.

Altered spells. In ravenloft, many of the spells from the PHB get altered. Anything extraplanar such as Summoning only being able to grab domain-only creatures and using the Astral spell simply won't work. Casting say Control Undead is weaker in Ravenloft and automatically triggers a Powers check while casting the reverse form of Cure Disease ("Causes Disease) automatically triggers a powers check (and yes, it is weird that the reverse of Heal, namely Harm, doesn't trigger a powers check)

re: XP

Definitely use the 1e xp rules. Mainly because I think a lot of new gamers would be bored at the glacial pace of xp advancement in 2e. Without the 1 gp = 1xp rule, you're looking at 2000 xp to reach 2nd level and a gnoll (a 2HD monster) only gave 35 xp while a regular goblin only gave 15 xp.


re: Surprise rules
DM determines if a surprise round is valid. Roll a d10 for the side that is surprised, a roll of 1, 2 or 3 means that that side is surprised and suffers a round of attacks and gives up a +1 bonus to the attacking side.

[Thane of Fife]

re: Surprise rules
DM determines if a surprise round is valid. Roll a d10 for the side that is surprised, a roll of 1, 2 or 3 means that that side is surprised and suffers a round of attacks and gives up a +1 bonus to the attacking side.

Note that this roll is modified by a character's reaction adjustment per his dexterity.


That might've been a 1e house rule or more likely an interpretation since there was nothing in the books I remember that said you couldn't get barding for your war dog

It actually specifies that, with your DM's agreement, any land animal can be barded. Sorry - 2nd edition so specifies.

[Lapak]

That sounds pretty much the same as first edition to me. Getting hirelings to accompany adventurers requires a heavy incentive and those willing to work day-to-day a few, far between, and desperate.Indeed. And while it may not be THAT difficult at first, parties that return from an adventure for the third time with an 80%+ fatality rate for their hirelings are going to find it awfully hard to hire replacements. If you have the rules for it on hand, I'd allow them to hire some backup at the beginning and make sure you actually enforce morale checks for them - hirelings are not suicide squads, and if the one who hired them gets killed or half of them die in a single trap or something the survivors are going to need to check morale.

As to the gp-for-xp rule: I've been following some of the 'old-school' discussion on this topic that's been bounced around over the last few months, and there are some interesting ideas to play with it. One way is to give xp only for treasure spent - it's one way to keep PCs from accumulating vast hoards. Another way is to give xp only for treasure spent frivolously: carousing in the taverns and blowing it all on drink and good times is worth XP, but buying a Sword + 1 with it is not. Part of the theoretical reason for the gp/xp rule in the first place was to encourage a more reasoned and tactical style of play: why would real adventurers bother fighting the dangerous carrion crawler when you can avoid it or block it off? The goblins are much likely to have something worth getting. And heck, why bother fighting THEM if you can intimidate them into giving up their loot without a fight?

Unfortunately, while I find all those ideas potentially interesting for a pulp adventure campaign, I'm not sure any are really thematically appropriate for the Domain of Dread. You're probably going to need to fill the XP gap with quest and/or roleplaying experience if you want faster advancement.

[Matthew]

Not really I found. The 1e rules had the 1gp = 1xp rule and the selling of treasure for xp rule clearly stated in both the DMG and PHB for 1st edition. There's no mention of this rule in any of the 2e PHB/DMG books.

Most monsters in 2e didn't get enough of a XP boost IMO to compensate for the loss that treasure brought and that's why 2e's xp glacial xp rate is an abnormality.

There certainly is a mention, right in the DMG experience point section:



As an option, the DM can award XP for the cash value of non-magical treasures. One XP can be given per gold piece found. However, overuse of this option can increase the tendency to give out too much treasure in the campaign."

I am looking at the pdf at the moment, so couldn't tell you the page number, but it comes just before the header "Individual Experience Awards (Optional Rule)"



Black cover PHB 2e page 151 2nd paragraph. Yeah...it even mentions that yes, a hireling such as a foot soldier can be used to man a wall but they will NOT accompany the player on an adventure.

I think you are referring to the section on "followers", but I cannot be sure. Not the same thing as hirelings, I would say, especially in the context of that section. Hirelings "often refuse" to accompany adventures into dangerous locations, which is pretty much the same deal as in first edition. They need to be given a liberal incentive, and even then most are not up for it.

At the very least we know NPC adventurers take men-at-arms into the dungeon, as the Monster Manual provides for encountering them. As with most second edition stuff, this is probably the result of a cut-and-paste job, but still.



Similarly, compare and contrast the rules for henchmen between the two editions. The 2nd edition version has way more restrictions and also you can't simply go to the local pub and get a henchman a la the 1e version.

For us, the 1e version was basically a way for a player to control two characters whereas the 2e version of the henchmen rules made it quite clear that it was a NPC under the control of the DM who just lent it out for a time.

Pg 153 (black cover PHB, 3rd paragraph, last line): "The DM at any time can dictate the actions of the henchman, since the character is still a NPC.

Check your 1e DMG, p. 103; the game master always has the last word on what a henchman will do.

I think it is fair to say that acquiring a henchman in second edition is as easy or difficult as the game master chooses to make it. Certainly there are no hard rules for it, but that is pretty much the modus operandi of second edition.



Unfortunately, while I find all those ideas potentially interesting for a pulp adventure campaign, I'm not sure any are really thematically appropriate for the Domain of Dread. You're probably going to need to fill the XP gap with quest and/or role-playing experience if you want faster advancement.
Yeah, I wonder if it would be possible to come up with a replacement system? The main thing driven by these "old school" ideas is that the players need some clear cut goals for advancement, and in Ravenloft it is probably fair to say that neither gold or combat will cut it. Maybe objectives could be set before play with fixed values for success?

[hamlet]

Hmmn. The second edition rules for experience points were just more open to interpretation than in the first edition. Basically, the game master was left to set the criteria, which could be identical to that set in first edition. However, it is true that in many cases the experience point value of creatures was greatly inflated in second edition, with little rhyme or reason.

A little exercise. Go through the monstrous compendium (or Monster Manual for 2e) and use the rules for XP as stated in the 2e DMG. Sometimes, you'll get different numbers than the ones listed in the monster entry (some under, some way over). Not sure if these are typos or just . . . I don't know what, but it's kinda odd at times. Doesn't matter, really, since in the end it's up to the DM to decide how much XP goes out regardless of what the book says.

Also remember that a number of monsters (dragons, giants, demons/devils/etc.) are noticeably more powerful in 2e than in 1e. Dragons became much more lethal, and devils/demons became ludicrously overpowered IMO.



I am not at all sure this is correct. From what I can see in the second edition books, henchmen can come under the control of players, which is the same as first edition, and no rule prevents hirelings from accompanying characters into the dungeon. I would be very interested to read such a rule, however!

It's not all correct. I was just reading stuff about henchmen last night. It says that the players are in control of their hencmen/employees, and that they will go into the dungeon if that's what they were hired to do and they are suitably compensated, but it went on to say that the DM can take control if he believes the players are ludicrously abusing what an NPC would realistically do (i.e., sacrifice his life so the PC's can hie off with the loot).

There's also simply less rules written down for it all, which is either a blessing or a curse depending on who you are.

[/quote]
Armoured war dogs? Nay, that sounds like a house rule! You could buy war dogs in either version of the rules, however.[/QUOTE]

Actually, you most certainly could armor a war dog. Just use the barding rules and adjust costs appropriately. War dogs are, actually, a great way to survive those first couple levels, and can be very usefull as harriers or even guards for the squishier PC's later in their careers. An obvious wizard is a tempting target. A wizard with three or four angry wardogs, much less so.

[Lapak]

Yeah, I wonder if it would be possible to come up with a replacement system? The main thing driven by these "old school" ideas is that the players need some clear cut goals for advancement, and in Ravenloft it is probably fair to say that neither gold or combat will cut it. Maybe objectives could be set before play with fixed values for success?Bonus XP for each innocent life preserved, maybe? For territorial control? For each time they irritate or frustrate the Powers or a Darklord? :smallwink:

[hamlet]

Yeah, I wonder if it would be possible to come up with a replacement system? The main thing driven by these "old school" ideas is that the players need some clear cut goals for advancement, and in Ravenloft it is probably fair to say that neither gold or combat will cut it. Maybe objectives could be set before play with fixed values for success?

One could simply use Story Awards as suggested in 2e DMG, or individual class awards.

[Matthew]

A little exercise. Go through the monstrous compendium (or Monster Manual for 2e) and use the rules for XP as stated in the 2e DMG. Sometimes, you'll get different numbers than the ones listed in the monster entry (some under, some way over). Not sure if these are typos or just . . . I don't know what, but it's kinda odd at times. Doesn't matter, really, since in the end it's up to the DM to decide how much XP goes out regardless of what the book says.

Also remember that a number of monsters (dragons, giants, demons/devils/etc.) are noticeably more powerful in 2e than in 1e. Dragons became much more lethal, and devils/demons became ludicrously overpowered IMO.

Yeah, there are quite a few like that. I suspect that the calculations were simply not vetted. The experience system would have surely have worked better if it was clearer that experience for defeating monsters was itself not set in stone. C'est la vie.



It's not all correct. I was just reading stuff about henchmen last night. It says that the players are in control of their hencmen/employees, and that they will go into the dungeon if that's what they were hired to do and they are suitably compensated, but it went on to say that the DM can take control if he believes the players are ludicrously abusing what an NPC would realistically do (i.e., sacrifice his life so the PC's can hie off with the loot).

There's also simply less rules written down for it all, which is either a blessing or a curse depending on who you are.

Yeah, looking again at the text it looks like there might be contradictory messages contained therein (what a surprise). Certainly, this test from the PHB implies that the various NPCs were intended to accompany player characters:



In the course of their adventures, player characters will be most concerned with three groups of NPCs: hirelings, followers, and henchmen. It is their aid that helps player characters vanquish deadly monsters and accomplish mighty deeds. As their names imply, these NPCs can be persuaded in various ways to join the player characters in their adventures. The most common methods of persuasion are money and loyalty.




Actually, you most certainly could armor a war dog. Just use the barding rules and adjust costs appropriately. War dogs are, actually, a great way to survive those first couple levels, and can be very usefull as harriers or even guards for the squishier PC's later in their careers. An obvious wizard is a tempting target. A wizard with three or four angry wardogs, much less so.

Sure, but not in first edition (from what I can tell).



Bonus XP for each innocent life preserved, maybe? For territorial control? For each time they irritate or frustrate the Powers or a Darklord? :smallwink:

Heh; yeah, it would work if you told the players "Hey, 27 villagers have gone missing, 100 EP for each one rescued", or something like that.



One could simply use Story Awards as suggested in 2e DMG, or individual class awards.

Could do, but class awards are a bit dodgy in implementation, granting experience for the successful use of abilities, which for fighters generally means... fighting. Story work, but they tend to be hidden, which is to say the players often do not know they are pursuing them or their significance beforehand. They could be written so that such was the case, though. If the game master tells them up front what the experience rewards of pursuing each adventure might be, essentially what the victory conditions are.

[hamlet]

Yeah, I know, double posting, so sue me . . .

Just a bit of advice that I thought semi-important . . .

Don't play through the Ravenloft modules like a campaign. In fact, the Grand Conjunction type modules in particular are rather . . . underwhelming. They focus too much on grand, sweeping, realm changing events much too similar like what they use to violate the Forgotten Realms every decade or so and the PC's end up as witnesses rather than actors.

Horror is, very often, most effecitve when it is personal and local. Bad things that happen to me, or to the people I know and have become attached to are more affecting than apocolyptic things. That thing happening over there is far less terrifying than the clan of werewolves kidnapping my neighbors for some ritual sacrifice or who knows what.

The modules are great for things that the players stumble into on their way to do something else, perhaps something critical or time sensitive in and of itself. That lends a sense of urgency to the whole thing that is natural rather than a hokey and artificial time limit imposed by any idiot plot. As a matter of fact, though it probably runs against the grain of many here, do your best not to have a "plot." Set the stage, and then let the PC's act on it. Then all you have to do is move your pieces about the world realistically.

And remember, just cause the players don't have time to investigate the evil vampire lord at the moment doesn't mean he'll sit there by himself and just reschedule their climactic battle. Once he's aware of them, he'll get himself ready for if and when they decide to come back.

[Matthew]

Yeah, I know, double posting, so sue me . . .

Saved you from that legal action. :smallwink:

[hamlet]

Could do, but class awards are a bit dodgy in implementation, granting experience for the successful use of abilities, which for fighters generally means... fighting. Story work, but they tend to be hidden, which is to say the players often do not know they are pursuing them or their significance beforehand. They could be written so that such was the case, though. If the game master tells them up front what the experience rewards of pursuing each adventure might be, essentially what the victory conditions are.

Not knowing what the story awards are ahead of time is, kind of, the point in a way. What? You want this to work like an MMO where an NPC stands with an exclamation point over his head and puts something in your quest log with a list of appropriate awards ahead of time so you can budget your resources?

My current DM laughs at us as we routinely act painfully like boyscouts and not at all like greedy adventurers. "What? There's a terrible demon in the woods eating innocents? We'll get him! You wait right here." In the meantime, the poor PC is left ignored, stammering something about how maybe we'd like a reward?

In a way, story rewards can become an excellent tool for the DM to quietly influence how his players act in the world. Want them to focus more on selfless heroics? Then hand out a bit of a bonus to them when they do things like that. Like good roleplaying? Then throw them a few hundred XP for somebody who plays very well in character. Better yet, instead of working it by individual, which sets up a competitive atmosphere, throw bonuses out to the entire group. "You all get 500Xp bonus because Tom over there did a great job roleplaying somebody under the effects of a halucinogen." You'd be amazed at the results.


Saved you from that legal action.

And again don't you know.:smallsmile:

[Thelas]

So if the Grand Conjunction modules aren't great and I want to run Feast of Goblyns, what would you recommend I run to get them up to level?
Preferably Ravenloft, because I'm in severe Ravenloft anticipation mode, and preferably free, because I don't want to pay for modules until I know the players actually like Ravenloft (I asked, no Demiplane of Dread prior visitors in my group (and obviously AD&D).

[hamlet]

So if the Grand Conjunction modules aren't great and I want to run Feast of Goblyns, what would you recommend I run to get them up to level?
Preferably Ravenloft, because I'm in severe Ravenloft anticipation mode, and preferably free, because I don't want to pay for modules until I know the players actually like Ravenloft (I asked, no Demiplane of Dread prior visitors in my group (and obviously AD&D).

My recommendation is this: if you want to run Ravenloft as a setting itself, then what you really need to do is spring for the boxed set (or better yet, the Realms of Terror hardback which has much of what's in the box, but in a single, better organized book) and use that as your basis. Then, pick up a couple of the modules that are lesser in scope and use them for inspiration to create your own niche in the demiplane. Feast of Goblyns is a good set piece module, especially when you merge it with Castles Forlorn as I said above. There are a couple of decent "collections" of short modules and encounters like The Book of Crypts and Darklords, but I can't recommend highly enough the "Creatures of the Night" sequence for some good inspirational reading.

Remember, leveling up in 2nd edition (or OSRIC for that matter) happens significantly slower than in D20. Those first three levels will seem to fly by, but after that, things slow down dramatically sometimes, and you need to realize you can't just plan on running one module of the Grand Conjunction after the other.

As for other recommendations: Adam's Wrath isn't bad. Neither is Bleak House if you're willing to take a hatchet to it. The Awakening can be fun. Carnival might be a nice interlude. The Created is a great way to creep out the overconfident (evil puppets, heh). Well, seriously they all have potential, but you have to be willing to really go at it with a sharp instrument to make it right for your group. A lot of Ravenloft's modules ended up being so heavily railroading, or so hokey, that they failed to live up to their own potential.

My recommendation is to take the collection type books that I mentioned and use them to construct your own region/domain adjacent to where you eventually want things to go. And most of all, don't think in a straight line. Think in squiggles.:smalltongue:

Also hit Dungeon Magazine. There's a VERY fun module in there called "Grim Harvest" with a VERY excellent 2nd edition monster that'll fit fine in OSRIC as well. Use the Doppleganger Plant against your group very carefully, and they'll love it in spite of themselves.

EDIT: Sorry, forgot to add this. Ravenloft is, above all, best experienced as a sort of tone poem rather than a full blown setting. It's about atmosphere and setup more than anything else. The special mechanics (power checks, modified spells, etc.) are really optional and not that integral. It's much more about what you do. If you can get your players to the point that, when they see the light at the end of the tunnel instead of saying "we're almost there guys!" they say "oh no, here it comes!", you've done something right. Sometimes, a 0-level human with a knife is far scarier than all the vampires, ghosts, and bugaboo's in the world.

[Thelas]

... Hey, no philosophizing. It makes me feel inadequate.

A quick Ctrl-F on the "Previous Edition Downloads" page on WoTC reveals that the modules you posted aren't there. I conclude:

Preferably Ravenloft, because I'm in severe Ravenloft anticipation mode, and preferably free, because I don't want to pay for modules until I know the players actually like Ravenloft (I asked, no Demiplane of Dread prior visitors in my group (and obviously AD&D).

Either they're on a site I don't know about (in which case linky please), or they are only available through finding the books, in which case can you suggest a free module? As I said,
I don't want to pay for modules until I know the players actually like Ravenloft

PS. I don't want to appear ungrateful, because the suggestions will be useful if I ever get the modules, but they won't be of use now. (Especially because we're starting on Friday, if everyone's done their characters).

[Thelas]

I'll probably end up playing NotWD and just get rid of the prophecy thing for the Grand Conjunction, and then find something later to get them up to level for Feast of Goblyns.

Or I could just tell them to level their characters to 3 or 4... wait, what level are you supposed to be for Feast of Goblyns again?

[hamlet]

I'll probably end up playing NotWD and just get rid of the prophecy thing for the Grand Conjunction, and then find something later to get them up to level for Feast of Goblyns.

That's not a bad idea at all, though to be honest I don't remember how central the whole prophecy thing is to the module.



Or I could just tell them to level their characters to 3 or 4... wait, what level are you supposed to be for Feast of Goblyns again?

I wouldn't recommend that, simply because the process of levelling up one level at a time is really integral to the AD&D experience. Gaining those levels is a lot of work and, in the end, engenders a real fealing of accomplishment. Just gifting them a couple of levels kind of cheapens things a bit.

As for where you can get the modules for free, well, there's really only one place I know of, and I won't recommend it to you. It involves exposing yourself to the overpaid lawyers of WOTC that are currently in search and destroy mode. In lieu of that, please accept this free advice for exactly what it's worth: your first couple of adventures in a horror campaign don't have to be horrifying. In fact, it's almost better if they're not since over a couple of relatively easy missions (find and kill the bandits, rescue somebody who's been kidnapped, etc.) you can do what some of the best non-slasher horror films do and build the players' comfort zone up. A village or town where they feel safe, where they go to rest after a long day in the dungeon, where they feel that the bad guys can't reach easily. Don't even tell the players that they're in Ravenloft.

Then, when you tear their comfort zone away, it's much more effective. A bad guy they didn't manage to kill, but only drive away (possibly one of the before mentioned bandits?) comes back for revenge, slips inside town, and murders somebody, pinning the blame on the PC's. Better yet, one of those bandits they chased away was really a lycanthrope and it was not revealed to the players (i.e., he didn't change at all), and now one of the players is infected, but they don't know it. On the first night of the full moon, grab one of the uninfected players and walk him away from the table. Tell him his character has had a bad dream and it kept him up at night, he's a little fatigued the next morning . . . but there was a murder last night in town, and some of the signs point to a wererat in town, but who? Eventually, some of the clues begin to point back at one or more of the PC's. Another murder the next night, and the next!

If the PC's don't manage to put 2 and 2 together to get 4, or better yet, get 5 instead, the murders stop and things seemingly go back to normal. Until the next full moon arrives. The PC's might start to believe they're being stalked by some terrible thing. Other towns, or even their former safe haven, might look at them askance, thinking that they're cursed, or that they're really ritual serial killers in disguise. Even when the players realize what's going on, now they're a squad of low level characters in a low level world looking for a cure to lycanthropy (which is VERY tough in AD&D) carrying their own ticking time bomb with them, looking for ways to humanely restrain their friend who will morph into an evil killing machine every month and pose a threat to everybody around them.

And while all of that's happening, an altar is found in the woods and a band of cultists dispersed, but clues lead to a larger population center where investigation leads to a large cult of wererats in the sewers, doing . . . something . . . and now the PC's with a wererat comrade might be tempted to use their friend's affliction as an in for investigation here, but what will the ramifications of using an evil cures/disease to one's own benefit be?

Sorry, that post really started to get away from me there. What I really wanted to get across is that, while the Ravenloft modules can be quite good, you can use anything and turn it into a horror campaign easily. Just don't start throwing out horror every two seconds or the players become innured to it. Learn from the best horror movies and learn the rythym(sp?) of how good horror stories go. Build in small bits, here and there, in seemingly unrelated ways, until everything starts to tie together in a terrible and unexpected way. Don't throw fear, horror, and powers checks at them all the time. In fact, they shouldn't get more than one a session, and not even every session. And remember, if they don't get "frightened," don't worry. Just keep going until you get to a point where you can tack against the wind and watch as the players realize, suddenly, that they've walked off in the wrong direction and have left something important behind them.

[Matthew]

Not knowing what the story awards are ahead of time is, kind of, the point in a way. What? You want this to work like an MMO where an NPC stands with an exclamation point over his head and puts something in your quest log with a list of appropriate awards ahead of time so you can budget your resources?

Having not played any CMMORPGs, I could not say, but yeah, the point would be so that the players knew exactly what their aims were and how many resources they were willing to risk on it. Very game-like, I agree, but that is rather the point from the perspective of using something "like gold, but not gold".



I'll probably end up playing NotWD and just get rid of the prophecy thing for the Grand Conjunction, and then find something later to get them up to level for Feast of Goblyns.

Or I could just tell them to level their characters to 3 or 4... wait, what level are you supposed to be for Feast of Goblyns again?

Just had a thought on your survivability issue and replacement characters. Have the initial envelopment of the mists spirit away a large group of characters, but deposit them in various different areas of Ravenloft. That way replacements can be brought in more easily and dramatically, without any recourse to "more mists, and a fighter appears". You can also increase immersion by having such characters bring news of their fellows and experiences in Ravenloft and what has happened in the absence of the player characters.

[Lapak]

Just had a thought on your survivability issue and replacement characters. Have the initial envelopment of the mists spirit away a large group of characters, but deposit them in various different areas of Ravenloft. That way replacements can be brought in more easily and dramatically, without any recourse to "more mists, and a fighter appears". You can also increase immersion by having such characters bring news of their fellows and experiences in Ravenloft and what has happened in the absence of the player characters.Or just allow them to bring in local replacements. Especially if one character manages to survive. Being the only one in the party who can remember that there is a world that isn't like Ravenloft would be nicely tragic. Heck, it might even kick him down the path of a darklord for extra irony.

[hamlet]

Having not played any CMMORPGs, I could not say, but yeah, the point would be so that the players knew exactly what their aims were and how many resources they were willing to risk on it. Very game-like, I agree, but that is rather the point from the perspective of using something "like gold, but not gold".


That's exactly what I'm talking about, though. There's no reason for anyone other than the players to list out what the players' aims are. In most cases, it should be obvious to the players where the expected adventure is, and it's up to them to follow it. Listing out what rewards go with what actions, though, is, frankly, silly.




Just had a thought on your survivability issue and replacement characters. Have the initial envelopment of the mists spirit away a large group of characters, but deposit them in various different areas of Ravenloft. That way replacements can be brought in more easily and dramatically, without any recourse to "more mists, and a fighter appears". You can also increase immersion by having such characters bring news of their fellows and experiences in Ravenloft and what has happened in the absence of the player characters.

That's a good idea, but only if you start outside of Ravenloft to begin with, and for the most part, it applies to "replaceability" and not "survivability."

Personally, I've never cared for "the mists" at all. They're hackneyed and all to often used as ultra-hamfisted tools to force the players where the DM wants them to go. Plot hammers.

Like I said before, the mists can be gotten rid of entirely with pretty much no ill effect IMO, and most of the setting specific rules aren't entirely neccessary either. It's all about tone, atmosphere, and mood.

In terms of survivability, I recommend giving each player a "save." A "save" can be redeemed for extrication from an otherwise unescapable situation, or perhaps a solid nudge when things get stymied. Each player gets one, and only one, save and it's up to the DM how it affects the situation whether "a miracle happens," or perhaps another adventuring party stumbles along and decides to lend a hand for a cut of the treasure (a cut being defined as most if not all). Another possibility is that a save can rescue somebody from certain death, though they might not survive whole.

With the concept of the demi-powers of Ravenloft lurking behind the scenes, this opens the possibility for further development depending on just who is providing the save.

[Matthew]

That's exactly what I'm talking about, though. There's no reason for anyone other than the players to list out what the players' aims are. In most cases, it should be obvious to the players where the expected adventure is, and it's up to them to follow it. Listing out what rewards go with what actions, though, is, frankly, silly.

I think it is a bit silly, but then so is EP for GP, conceptually. The benefit is chiefly that the players have clear-cut goals with very little ambiguity or subjectivity.



That's a good idea, but only if you start outside of Ravenloft to begin with, and for the most part, it applies to "replaceability" and not "survivability."

Right, but the issue was survivability because of the difficulty of replacing a given character without making him a native of the setting (or at least, that is what I recall). Keeping the player characters as "outsiders" has advantages with regards to the "horror" setup, though there are obviously many possible different approaches. I seem to recall that our group recruited from the native population without much of a problem.

[hamlet]

I think it is a bit silly, but then so is EP for GP, conceptually. The benefit is chiefly that the players have clear-cut goals with very little ambiguity or subjectivity.


I don't see lack of clear-cut goals without ambiguity or subjectivity to be a problem at all.

[Thelas]

Or just allow them to bring in local replacements. Especially if one character manages to survive. Being the only one in the party who can remember that there is a world that isn't like Ravenloft would be nicely tragic. Heck, it might even kick him down the path of a darklord for extra irony.

I likeses.
[Insert me being nervous because first session is tomorrow here.]
Any more useful stuff before I start? And do you think it will be interesting if I keep a campaign log over here on Giantitp (none of my players go on as far as I know, I'll just ask at the start of the session)?

[hamlet]

Can't hurt to leave a campaign log here with some DM notes on decisions and such.

[Matthew]

I don't see lack of clear-cut goals without ambiguity or subjectivity to be a problem at all.

Sure, the suggestion was just from the point of view that somebody might want those things.



[Insert me being nervous because first session is tomorrow here.]
Any more useful stuff before I start? And do you think it will be interesting if I keep a campaign log over here on Giantitp (none of my players go on as far as I know, I'll just ask at the start of the session)?

Have fun with it! I am sure keeping a log will be interesting.