Starting a D&D game at mid-level

[VoxRationis]

So I've been inspired to make an old-school dungeon crawl with old-school rules. I intend on running a one-shot adventure in AD&D 2e (the late 90s printing, in case it matters). However, since the central point of the adventure is the old "save the princess to marry her and get 1/2 the kingdom" trope*, it doesn't make a ton of sense for the players to be 1st-level chumps, and so I intend on starting it at around 6-8th level (I haven't made up my mind which one, but I'll give everyone an XP budget equal to what it would take to get a wizard to the level I choose). However, the DM's Guide is kind of taciturn about the concept of starting above 1st level. How much equipment should such characters get? Would henchmen be appropriate (maybe if they make a Charisma check on character creation)? How many spells should the party wizard start off with? Should anyone have magic items?


*Mixed with a little bit of It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World/Rat Race, since obviously only one person can marry the princess and claim half the kingdom...

[Magua]

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?248334-2e-Question-Loot-for-characters-starting-beyond-level-1

tldr: No official rules, wing it.

Give them a gold budget and let them spend it on equipment, henchmen, magic items, etc as needed. Say 10,000-15,000gp per player.

Wizards got some number of 1st level spells at level 1, and then gained an additional spell per level after that. I would just make them pay for more (50gp or 100gp * spell level). Note that there is a maximum number of spells per level that they can know, based on their Intelligence.

[hamlet]

You might also want to go through the magic items and maybe spell lists and specifically rule out anything you feel wouldn't be appropriate. Staff of the Magi, scrolls of Wish and all that.

For number of spells, I generally follow a rule that a wizard can have as many spells per level in their book as they can cast per day +1d6. Some variety, but not an insane amount and reflects the fact that they've been adventuring for a couple years now and have been able to dig out some spells.

[Lord Torath]

A DM I had let me pick magic items with an xp value equal to my starting XP (level 3 mage, 5000 xp), with a per-item max of 1500 xp. I also got my starting level x the maximum starting gold for my class for mundane gear.

For anther character, he gave me gold equal to 10% of my XP, and randomly-rolled 4 magic weapons and 4 misc. magic items (starting as a level 9 paladin).

[VoxRationis]

What rules do people think worked well? Magic item value equal to total XP seems a little much... Also, do people have rules for starting henchmen or hirelings?

[Lord Torath]

What rules do people think worked well? Magic item value equal to total XP seems a little much... Also, do people have rules for starting henchmen or hirelings?To be fair, that was a pretty magic-rich campaign - one of the other players had the Thunderhammer triple-play, and I was making a character to join in the existing game (hint: magic Quarterstaffs and Special Daggers are very cheap XP-wise compared to other magic weapons).

I think the NPC-party-building rules in the Monstrous Manual are a good way to go.

[FreddyNoNose]

What rules do people think worked well? Magic item value equal to total XP seems a little much... Also, do people have rules for starting henchmen or hirelings?

A bad thing the DMs can do it to give out too much magic items. Remember that it is easier to give than to take away. Therefore it is much better to start them underpowered than overpowered. You can fix underpowered by giving more items but perhaps keeping them a bit underpowered is best!

You should only let into the game items/spells that you are ok with having in your game and that are appropriate to the setting.


A point system is the way to go rather than gold. Avoid using the xp/gold value in the dmg for this and make up your own system. I would make up lists by class/subclass. Fighters and sub-types get one, mages another, cleric/druids another, rogue/assassins another.

Think of a fighter and for 6 - 8 levels start with the following types of items: one weapon, one armor or shield, one misc magic item or jewelry and a some potions. Plus to weapons and armor/shield as follows: Levels 4-7 get +1, 8-11 get +2, 12-15 get +3

So a 6th to 8th level fighter might have 600 - 800 points to spend on a list like this:
Potions:
60 Extra Healing
40 Fire Resistance
50 Giant Strength
25 Healing
30 Heroism
40 Invulnerability
70 Super-Heroism

Melee Weapon: (obviously you can only buy one primary weapon. It means first weapon. Secondary means second weapon. So if you buy two +1 short swords, the cost is 75 (+1 primary) + 125 (+1 secondary).
75 +1 Primary Weapon (4th level+)
150 +2 Primary Weapon (8th level +)
125 +1 Secondary Weapon (4th level+)
250 +2 Secondary Weapon (8th level +)

Range/missile/throwing Weapon:
75 +1 Primary Weapon (4th level+)
150 +2 Primary Weapon (8th level +)
25 +1 arrows/bolts: count 20 (4th level+)
50 +2 arrows/bolts count 20 (8th level +)

Armor:
125 +1 chain mail (4th level+)
190 +1 plate mail (4th level+)
75 +1 shield (4th level+)
180 +2 chain mail (8th level +)
300 +2 plate mail (8th level +)
150 +2 shield (8th level +)

Jewelry:
200 Ring of Free Action
130 Ring of Protection +1
90 Ring of Swimming

Misc Magic:
300 Bag of Holding weight limit 500
250 Boots of Elvenkind
225 Dust of appearance (5 uses)
80 Horseshoes of speed
170 Horn of Blasting
150 Javelin of Lightning (quantity 3)
50 Javelin of Lightning (quantity 1)

I am not saying use these values or items. This is just an example and no doubt the costs are wacky. Just an idea.

[VoxRationis]

To be fair, that was a pretty magic-rich campaign - one of the other players had the Thunderhammer triple-play, and I was making a character to join in the existing game (hint: magic Quarterstaffs and Special Daggers are very cheap XP-wise compared to other magic weapons).

I think the NPC-party-building rules in the Monstrous Manual are a good way to go.

Hmm. Yet another reason to get my hands on the Monstrous Manual. Anyone know of a good way to get it cheap, or better, free?

*Edit: I have the Monster Manual II, but I think there are some rules differences, and it doesn't have any good explanations of how to use the monsters.

[Jay R]

In a 2e game you don't usually get to choose your items. I recommend that the DM roll up about 2-3 treasures from each level that they have already gone through. [Treasures of 2-3 monsters you'd send after a first level party, then 2-3 monsters you'd send after a 2nd level party, etc.] Then drop about 2/3 of the one-shot items and 1/3 of the limited use items, on the assumption that they would have already used them. Take the number of charges of the remaining limited-use items down a lot - but don't reduce much from the last few treasures rolled.

I'd make sure that there was at least one really good item for each player, and a good mix of one-shot items, wands and other charged items with few charges left, protective gear, and some weird ones you have no idea how they can use. [These last are the most fun, if they are creative.]

[hamlet]

Hmm. Yet another reason to get my hands on the Monstrous Manual. Anyone know of a good way to get it cheap, or better, free?

*Edit: I have the Monster Manual II, but I think there are some rules differences, and it doesn't have any good explanations of how to use the monsters.

WOTC has pdf's of the books for sale at, I think, $5 each out there. Cannot tell you where to get it for free, though.

[Lord Torath]

Hmm. Yet another reason to get my hands on the Monstrous Manual. Anyone know of a good way to get it cheap, or better, free?.How cheap is cheap? eBay (https://www.ebay.com/sch/Toys-Hobbies/220/i.html?_from=R40&_sop=15&_nkw=monstrous+manual) has it for $8+shipping.

[LibraryOgre]

I concur with using the NPC party building rules. It gives them a random selection of items, as you get in playing.

[VoxRationis]

Thanks for all the advice, everyone.

[VoxRationis]

More questions:
What are the favored methods of stat generation? 2e tends to be lower-power than later editions, I understand, but 3d6 in order for all stats still seems a trifle harsh. Or do people just do it by the book?

[Magua]

Depends what you're going for. If it's the old timey feel, 3d6 in order is where it's at. But such things like "wanting to play a wizard but rolled an 8 for intelligence" never seemed like the recipe for a good time.

Personally, I used "roll 6x 3d6, arrange as desired", but they could also try as many times as they wanted.

[Thrudd]

I think "4d6 drop lowest arrange as desired" has been the most popular for most of the groups I've seen, from 1e onward. In 2e it was further down the list of methods, but it's still there in the DMG.

For a certain type of game, I like rolling stats in order, but one set of 3d6 is a little harsh for AD&D. I would go with 3d6 choose the best of 2 or 3 for each stat, in order. The 1e method where you get 3d6 x6 for each stat creates very high scores, is probably too much.

I think the method that is a proto-point buy (I forget which number method it is, it's the last one in the DMG) is good for a game where you want the players to be able to choose their class and be pretty sure of qualifying for it. I only modify what's in the book by giving them an extra die or two, because I find that 7 dice tends to give scores a bit on the low side. The good thing for them is, everything starts at 8, so they are sure not to have any penalties if they don't want them. Everything starts at eight. You roll the seven (or eight or nine) dice. Then add the results of the dice to the various stats as you desire, with the only rule being you have to use the whole numbers and the max for all stats is 18.

[FreddyNoNose]

More questions:
What are the favored methods of stat generation? 2e tends to be lower-power than later editions, I understand, but 3d6 in order for all stats still seems a trifle harsh. Or do people just do it by the book?

I prefer 3d6 but use 4d6b3 in my 1st ed ad&d campaign. You don't get the place the stats. You roll for a given stat and keep it.

[hamlet]

I've always done 4d6k3, but when playing AD&D as DM asked players to put them in order rolled. Why? Because it tends to push folks into something unexpected and new. They might not get to play the mage they really wanted, but sometimes they get a different character that they fall in love with simply because it was so unexpected. I've only ever had one complaint, and that ended very swiftly when the player declared that he loved it and wouldn't dream of trying to rearrange his stats to taste.

Also tends to preserve just a little of the old school flavor, too.

[FreddyNoNose]

I've always done 4d6k3, but when playing AD&D as DM asked players to put them in order rolled. Why? Because it tends to push folks into something unexpected and new. They might not get to play the mage they really wanted, but sometimes they get a different character that they fall in love with simply because it was so unexpected. I've only ever had one complaint, and that ended very swiftly when the player declared that he loved it and wouldn't dream of trying to rearrange his stats to taste.

Also tends to preserve just a little of the old school flavor, too.

Or they could get the mage with a 12 Int, the cleric with a 13 wisdom, the fighter with the 14 strength, or the no paladin for you!

They also get more challenge or perhaps learn to rise up their playing level.

[Jay R]

I have had good luck using a hybrid. 3d6 in order, but with two options:
1. You can use them in either order. Strength is either the first one or the last one.
2. You can read either the tops or the bottoms of the dice. (This is equivalent to either using the rolls you got, or subtracting them all from 21 and using that.

The second option guarantees at least an average set of rolls, and the first one give some options about where they go. [In fact, a really poor set of rolls becomes excellent when you turn the dice over.]

For an example, I will roll six stats: 12, 12, 6, 13, 16, 7.

You can subtract them from 21, using 9, 9, 15, 8, 5, 14.

And/or you can reverse the order: 7, 16, 13, 6, 12, 12.

Doing both gives 14, 5, 8, 15, 9, 9.

So you can play any of the following:
STR 12, DEX 12, CON 6, INT 13, WIS 16, CHA 7. Reasonable wizard; good cleric.
STR 9, DEX 9, CON 15, INT 8, WIS 5, CHA 14. Possible bard
STR 7, DEX 16, CON 13, INT 6, WIS 12, CHA 12. Good thief
STR 14, DEX 5, CON 8, INT 15, WIS 9, CHA 9. Possible fighter. Good wizard.

It allows some flexibility while retaining the old-school approach that you don't play just anything you want.

[FreddyNoNose]

I have had good luck using a hybrid. 3d6 in order, but with two options:
1. You can use them in either order. Strength is either the first one or the last one.
2. You can read either the tops or the bottoms of the dice. (This is equivalent to either using the rolls you got, or subtracting them all from 21 and using that.

The second option guarantees at least an average set of rolls, and the first one give some options about where they go. [In fact, a really poor set of rolls becomes excellent when you turn the dice over.]

For an example, I will roll six stats: 12, 12, 6, 13, 16, 7.

You can subtract them from 21, using 9, 9, 15, 8, 5, 14.

And/or you can reverse the order: 7, 16, 13, 6, 12, 12.

Doing both gives 14, 5, 8, 15, 9, 9.

So you can play any of the following:
STR 12, DEX 12, CON 6, INT 13, WIS 16, CHA 7. Reasonable wizard; good cleric.
STR 9, DEX 9, CON 15, INT 8, WIS 5, CHA 14. Possible bard
STR 7, DEX 16, CON 13, INT 6, WIS 12, CHA 12. Good thief
STR 14, DEX 5, CON 8, INT 15, WIS 9, CHA 9. Possible fighter. Good wizard.

It allows some flexibility while retaining the old-school approach that you don't play just anything you want.

I don't like it. Might as well make it straight rolls on each stat no monkeying around with it.

[LibraryOgre]

One thing I have done (in C&C) was have folks roll 3d6, arrange to taste... but they can increase their Primes* to 15, then adjust for race. Do you put your good stats in your Primes, leaving you with some poor stats? Or do you put that 4 on a prime, and bump it up to a 15 automagically?

*Characters in C&C have 2 Primes; one is determined by your class, the other, you get to pick. Primes are a shorthand for skill training, good saves, and a bunch of other stuff. So, all fighters have Strength prime, all thieves Dexterity, etc.. Humans have the special ability of a 3rd prime.

[Jay R]

I don't like it. Might as well make it straight rolls on each stat no monkeying around with it.

Fine. Then don't play with it. We should all play in ways that we can enjoy, and we'll never agree what the One True Way to play should be.

My players enjoyed it, and that's all I needed.

[FreddyNoNose]

Fine. Then don't play with it. We should all play in ways that we can enjoy, and we'll never agree what the One True Way to play should be.

My players enjoyed it, and that's all I needed.

True that. Just saying I don't like it. Isn't a slam on anything. Don't take it personally.

[Tinkerer]

Ooh, I really like being able to take the tops or bottoms of the dice set. Leaves the "play what you roll" aspect of rolling 3d6 down the line but guarantees you at least an average person. Because let's face it, playing a character who is under 9 in all stats generally sucks. Favourite RPG discovery of the month right there. I wouldn't personally use the option of reversing the order on top of that but to each his own.

[hamlet]

Ooh, I really like being able to take the tops or bottoms of the dice set. Leaves the "play what you roll" aspect of rolling 3d6 down the line but guarantees you at least an average person. Because let's face it, playing a character who is under 9 in all stats generally sucks. Favourite RPG discovery of the month right there. I wouldn't personally use the option of reversing the order on top of that but to each his own.

Which is why, as I recall, it's actually in the rules that if you roll so low you should roll again since you don't qualify for any class.

In any case, my general rule is that folks can roll up sets of stats until they find one they're relatively happy with. Within reason. You want to roll 5 in a row? Go for it. After that or if you end up taking 30 or 40 minutes just to generate 6 numbers, as the DM I start to get irritated, and an irritated DM tends not to fudge the dice in your favor.

[LibraryOgre]

Something Hackmaster includes is the "Shopkeeper Rule"... if your stats are so bad (two stats under 5 or none above 13, IIRC), you can simply discard them. Roll a new set of 7. The game also provides a concrete advantage to keeping your stats as they're rolled, or making only a modest change, rather than arranging them to taste. It makes for some more unique characters with odd strengths and weaknesses.

[hifidelity2]

I have always used 4d6 best 3 place where you want

Yes it means the "Wizard" player always get the high INT for his Wizard etc but if that is what he likes playing then so be it

[Knaight]

Something Hackmaster includes is the "Shopkeeper Rule"... if your stats are so bad (two stats under 5 or none above 13, IIRC), you can simply discard them. Roll a new set of 7. The game also provides a concrete advantage to keeping your stats as they're rolled, or making only a modest change, rather than arranging them to taste. It makes for some more unique characters with odd strengths and weaknesses.

The question is, do you actually get to flesh out the failed character as Shopkeeper NPC and then hand that to the GM? If so, that rule suddenly sounds really fun.

[LibraryOgre]

The question is, do you actually get to flesh out the failed character as Shopkeeper NPC and then hand that to the GM? If so, that rule suddenly sounds really fun.

Nothing says you can't. ;-) Mostly, it's "These stats are too poor to be an adventurer. Roll a different set of stats."

[VoxRationis]

Are there any general guidelines for "basic necessities" by this general level? How many healing potions are necessary to keep people from dying all the time? Should they have +1 weapons by this point?

[JadedDM]

Not really. Magical items are not a necessity needed to live in 2E. They are more like a special bonus. I've run games where the party has made it up to level 6 with no magical items whatsoever.

(The exception, there are some monsters that cannot take damage from non-magical weapons. If you intend to use them any, it might be a good idea to start them out with some +1 weapons.)

[Jay R]

Not really. Magical items are not a necessity needed to live in 2E.

True. But a party is at much more risk if they don't have a cleric.

Frankly, I think the generally accepted amount of needed healing is one cleric at the party's level.

[LibraryOgre]

True. But a party is at much more risk if they don't have a cleric.

Frankly, I think the generally accepted amount of needed healing is one cleric at the party's level.

...With major access to healing. Not having major access to healing makes your cleric less a cleric, more a fighter/mage.

[Jay R]

...With major access to healing. Not having major access to healing makes your cleric less a cleric, more a fighter/mage.

I thought we were talking about 2e.

[VoxRationis]

I'll have to remind the player to prepare healing spells. We've only played 3.5, and we're used to spontaneous cure.

[hamlet]

The "spontaneous cure" is actually not a bad house rule for 2e, especially if it's a god of healing. I've used it once and had good results, namely the player suddenly "discovering" all the other great cleric spells that aren't "cure x wounds" and the like.

And the number of potions really depends on a few factors. In some worlds like Forgotten Realms for instance, potions are to a certain extent readily available in town, so maybe having a few isn't out of line. In other, less magic intense worlds, magic healing is a lot rarer, so maybe they wouldn't have one or finding one would be a big discovery. It really depends on the game at hand.

Heck, in certain time periods in Dragonlance, there was NO magic healing, which really can throw a group of gamers for a loop.

[LibraryOgre]

I thought we were talking about 2e.

And Healing is a sphere of Priest spells, which certain priests might not have Major access to.


The "spontaneous cure" is actually not a bad house rule for 2e, especially if it's a god of healing. I've used it once and had good results, namely the player suddenly "discovering" all the other great cleric spells that aren't "cure x wounds" and the like.

And the number of potions really depends on a few factors. In some worlds like Forgotten Realms for instance, potions are to a certain extent readily available in town, so maybe having a few isn't out of line. In other, less magic intense worlds, magic healing is a lot rarer, so maybe they wouldn't have one or finding one would be a big discovery. It really depends on the game at hand.

Heck, in certain time periods in Dragonlance, there was NO magic healing, which really can throw a group of gamers for a loop.

TBH, if I were reworking AD&D from the beginning, I'd be tempted to leave wizards as-is, and put clerics on a system similar to 3.x sorcerers, with some option to access spells they didn't take as their "ready miracles".

[VoxRationis]

Wow. Shields don't do much in this game, do they? Do you think an oval scutum (as in Republican or Late Roman armies) would be a "medium shield" or a "body shield"?

[MeeposFire]

Honestly after playing 5e I would make clerics work as they do there where you get a number of spells you can prepare and you can use the spell slots to cast those spells. SO for instance you could prepare a number of cleric spells equal to your level plus some additional equal to a bonus from your wisdom score (perhaps equal to the save adjustment or something else) and those are your prepared spells for the day. You can then cast any of those prepared spells using your spell slots as normal and you choose which spell you are casting as you cast. This expends the slot but you still have the individual spell prepared so you can cast it again using a different spell slot.

If you use this then you have to consider that AD&D has more spells to do the same thing than 5e does so you may need more spells prepared than default 5e for example in 5e cure wounds is the same as cure light wounds, cure serious wounds, cure critical wounds, etc depending on what slot you cast it with.

[Jay R]

And Healing is a sphere of Priest spells, which certain priests might not have Major access to.

I'll have to take your word on that. I've never seen a 2e cleric without healing spells.

[Lord Torath]

Well, Dark Sun elemental clerics only have minor access to the healing sphere (spells of 1st-3rd level). I'm pretty sure the CPHB had several specialty priests with minor or no access to the Healing Sphere as well. Not that I've ever seen one of those CPHB priests played...

I'm actually playing a Cleric of Air in a Dark Sun campaign. For a definition of "playing" that roughly means "one session every 6-8 months".

[Jay R]

OK, let me modify my original statement:

"Frankly, I think the generally accepted amount of needed healing is one cleric at the party's level who actually heals."

full water bottles. To any competent reader a cleric's worth of healing implies a cleric who heals. But people wanted me to spell it out, so I have.]

[LibraryOgre]

Wow. Shields don't do much in this game, do they? Do you think an oval scutum (as in Republican or Late Roman armies) would be a "medium shield" or a "body shield"?

Shields are pretty consistently undervalued in D&D. Their biggest advantage is "Can carry more bonuses" beyond what just armor can.

[MeeposFire]

Shields are pretty consistently undervalued in D&D. Their biggest advantage is "Can carry more bonuses" beyond what just armor can.

Funny where I have been it was two handed weapons that were looked down upon though that was because non- of the groups I have ever played with wanted to play with the damage vs large creatures rules (or weapon type vs armor either for that matter) and without those rules (and in some weapons cases as I recall even with them) the difference in damage is so small that shields are the much better choice. Somewhat averted if you use the kote (though finding magic versions of those would be very rare).

Heck even if you want offense a shield user could pick up sword and shield style from C&T (has to be that version so you can keep your AC) and possibly two weapon fighting (if your dex is low) so you can smack people for extra damage with your shield.

[Khedrac]

Shields are pretty consistently undervalued in D&D. Their biggest advantage is "Can carry more bonuses" beyond what just armor can.


Funny where I have been it was two handed weapons that were looked down upon though that was because non- of the groups I have ever played with wanted to play with the damage vs large creatures rules (or weapon type vs armor either for that matter) and without those rules (and in some weapons cases as I recall even with them) the difference in damage is so small that shields are the much better choice. Somewhat averted if you use the kote (though finding magic versions of those would be very rare).

I would agree with both of these. The severe undervaluing of shields does not stop them from being a better choice than two-handed weapons in many circumstances (AD&D).
Note, if you think shields undervalued in AD&D and BECMI D&D check out 3rd Ed - two handed weapons received a large power boost making shields an even worse choice (for most fighters, shields are ignored until one can buy an animated shield).

I think the problem with shields in D&D comes from the hit point system - when you have a system when hit points reflect the general wearing down of a character then allowing anything (i.e. shields) to negate attacks makes a huge difference to the balance of combat (case in point, in BECMI if you use weapon mastery rules then anyone not choosing a weapon with deflect capability is effectively committing suicide in higher level combat).
Shields work well in systems where combat is designed for weapons (shields) and combat techniques (parrying) which can negate attacks (see systems like RuneQuest), of course these are usually systems where it only takes one or two unblocked hits to disable an opponent.

Besiades, if you think shields are undervalued, check out parrying in AD&D - at least 3rd Ed made "fighting defensively" slightly more viable; slightly.

[JadedDM]

I'll have to take your word on that. I've never seen a 2e cleric without healing spells.
Funny timing, but someone just last night rolled up a cleric of Gilgeam in my Doom of Daggerdale game who has no access to the healing sphere whatsoever. Literally a cleric who cannot cast healing spells. (Luckily there is already a cleric of Lathander in the party who specializes in healing, or that might be an issue.)

[LibraryOgre]

I would agree with both of these. The severe undervaluing of shields does not stop them from being a better choice than two-handed weapons in many circumstances (AD&D).
Note, if you think shields undervalued in AD&D and BECMI D&D check out 3rd Ed - two handed weapons received a large power boost making shields an even worse choice (for most fighters, shields are ignored until one can buy an animated shield).

Yeah, 3.x REALLY loved two-handed weapons.


I think the problem with shields in D&D comes from the hit point system - when you have a system when hit points reflect the general wearing down of a character then allowing anything (i.e. shields) to negate attacks makes a huge difference to the balance of combat (case in point, in BECMI if you use weapon mastery rules then anyone not choosing a weapon with deflect capability is effectively committing suicide in higher level combat).


I disagree, but I would reference Hackmaster as a counter-example... while broadly similar to D&D in mechanics, shields do several things:
1) They are the default for defense. Not using a shield puts you at a -4... using a shield is +2 to +6 (though, if your defense roll is not 10 points higher than that attack, you take a shield hit... somewhere about half damage).
2) Shields provide cover from missile fire. There's a flat chance that any arrow fired at you hits your shield and, essentially, gets ignored.

[MeeposFire]

Most games I played in used a lot of shields. They were very effective heck even in games like Baldurs Gate shields are great at least until BG2's expansion where the enemies THAC0 gets so high that the AC cap prevents you from actually avoiding significant damage shield or not (which makes two weapon fighting so much better late game).

Actually that is one way where shields may become poor if you use an AC limit and if it is too low (high I guess how should I describe that?).

[VoxRationis]

I doubt anyone's going to hit AC -10 or lower anyway. Thoughts on the scutum?

[LibraryOgre]

I doubt anyone's going to hit AC -10 or lower anyway. Thoughts on the scutum?

Body.

Hold a shield so the top is level with your shoulder. If it doesn't go down to your waist, it's a buckler. If it goes to your waist, it's small. If it goes to your thigh, it's medium. If it goes to your knee or below, it's body.

[VoxRationis]

Thanks! If only that piece of advice were in the books.

[Khedrac]

I disagree, but I would reference Hackmaster as a counter-example... while broadly similar to D&D in mechanics, shields do several things:
1) They are the default for defense. Not using a shield puts you at a -4... using a shield is +2 to +6 (though, if your defense roll is not 10 points higher than that attack, you take a shield hit... somewhere about half damage).
2) Shields provide cover from missile fire. There's a flat chance that any arrow fired at you hits your shield and, essentially, gets ignored.
Nice - a much better way to handle shields in a D&D-type system. I sit corrected.

[Misereor]

A couple of thoughts.

The original 2nd edition Monstrous Compendium has "Magic items for NPCs according to level" tables somewhere in the back.
I've sometimes used it to equip new characters starting at higher levels. (For some reason +5 magical shields are overrepresented, but I'm sure your players won't mind.)

If your players like exceptional characters, 5d6k3 won't by any means destabilize a 2nd ed. adventure.

2nd ed. doesn't use damage reduction like 3.X. Either a creature is completely immune to your weapon or it takes full damage.
Depends on what you throw at them, but above level 4, there should be magical weapons in the party.
(More than once I've been reduced to hitting stuff with my torch for the measly fire damage. Good times!)

Spells changed a lot from 2nd to 3rd ed, so make sure to tell your mates to read up if they want to play spellcasters.

[LibraryOgre]

A couple of thoughts.

The original 2nd edition Monstrous Compendium has "Magic items for NPCs according to level" tables somewhere in the back.
I've sometimes used it to equip new characters starting at higher levels. (For some reason +5 magical shields are overrepresented, but I'm sure your players won't mind.)

If your players like exceptional characters, 5d6k3 won't by any means destabilize a 2nd ed. adventure.

2nd ed. doesn't use damage reduction like 3.X. Either a creature is completely immune to your weapon or it takes full damage.
Depends on what you throw at them, but above level 4, there should be magical weapons in the party.
(More than once I've been reduced to hitting stuff with my torch for the measly fire damage. Good times!)

Spells changed a lot from 2nd to 3rd ed, so make sure to tell your mates to read up if they want to play spellcasters.

Things we have used when magic weapons are unavailable...

Torches.
Wrestling/Punching.
Shield bashes with a +1 shield.
Someone tried to get away with repeated headbutts with a +1 helmet.

[Telok]

Spells changed a lot from 2nd to 3rd ed, so make sure to tell your mates to read up if they want to play spellcasters.

Fireball by volume. Lightning bolt into water. Haste wins a fight if you dare to cast it. Gods, I loved the challenge of playing casters sometimes.

[Misereor]

Fireball by volume. Lightning bolt into water. Haste wins a fight if you dare to cast it. Gods, I loved the challenge of playing casters sometimes.

Casting infinite wishes by Magic Jar'ing random badguys to take the drain. Save or die spells. Save or die next round spells. Don't get a save and still die next round spells. Having to rest 8 hours after casting Identify. Getting hit in the face by your own Lightning Bolt. Ahh, the memories... :)

[Telok]

Having to rest 8 hours after casting Identify. Getting hit in the face by your own Lightning Bolt. Ahh, the memories... :)

Yup. Objections to magic being difficult to do well have led to the modern editions versions of spells and abilities that people tend to complain about.

I can't speak to the magic jar trick, we were never that evil.


Someone tried to get away with repeated headbutts with a +1 helmet.
I do recall someone beating a critter with the party's halfling because he was wearing magic armor. Another thing that happened with our group a couple times was using tridents and nets to pin down monsters until the person with a magic weapon could get there.

[MeeposFire]

Fireball by volume. Lightning bolt into water. Haste wins a fight if you dare to cast it. Gods, I loved the challenge of playing casters sometimes.

Ah haste is good times especially if you play with absolute dedication to the rules. Considering that magic that ages you can cause you to have to roll a system shock roll to survive and haste ages you it can literally kill you and your party with the spell if you got REALLY unlucky. From what I recall anyway.

[LibraryOgre]

Ah haste is good times especially if you play with absolute dedication to the rules. Considering that magic that ages you can cause you to have to roll a system shock roll to survive and haste ages you it can literally kill you and your party with the spell if you got REALLY unlucky. From what I recall anyway.

So, fun story time:

I was playing a bard in a high level game. My spells included Find Familiar, Haste, and Polymorph Other. Given some free reign with acquiring magic items, I got a few Ioun stones and a luck stone.

Polymorph Other has a chance that the target will become the creature polymorphed into. Not just look like it, but become one in all ways. I took my familiar and used Polymorph Other to turn the little moggie into... a Gold Dragon. Give it enough time, and the familiar BECOMES a gold dragon (especially since its effective level is my level, making it a smaller jump). Then I load it up with Ioun stones that increase constitution, and give it my luck stone, making it so the new gold dragon couldn't fail a system shock roll. And then I spent a lot of time (before the game) casting Haste on it.

How old do you want your Gold Dragon familiar to be?

[thorr-kan]

Things we have used when magic weapons are unavailable...

Torches.
Wrestling/Punching.
Shield bashes with a +1 shield.
Someone tried to get away with repeated headbutts with a +1 helmet.
Lasso.

When your 1st-level party gets jumped by a gargoyle, you'll be glad the Commoner took his one WP in lasso and deigned to take the Rope Use NWP. I lassoed the gargoyle, tied off the other end, and made the Rope Use check.

DM says, "You've successfully tied off the lasso. The gargoyle has a limited range of flight. What do you do?"

I grin and crack my knuckes. "RUN." Entire party bolts.

DM says, "Whuh?"

No magic items. We lived to fight another day and found some goblins to go beat up.

[thorr-kan]

So, fun story time:

I was playing a bard in a high level game. My spells included Find Familiar, Haste, and Polymorph Other. Given some free reign with acquiring magic items, I got a few Ioun stones and a luck stone.

How old do you want your Gold Dragon familiar to be?
Nice.

I always liked the immortal bard route. I never got to actually try it, but I think it works. Spells needed are Magic Jar and Stone to Flesh.

1. Carve a really nice human statue.
2. Cast Stone to Flesh on the statue.
3. Cast Magic Jar on yourself.
4. Possess the statue.
5. PROFIT!

[Lord Torath]

So, fun story time:

I was playing a bard in a high level game. My spells included Find Familiar, Haste, and Polymorph Other. Given some free reign with acquiring magic items, I got a few Ioun stones and a luck stone.

Polymorph Other has a chance that the target will become the creature polymorphed into. Not just look like it, but become one in all ways. I took my familiar and used Polymorph Other to turn the little moggie into... a Gold Dragon. Give it enough time, and the familiar BECOMES a gold dragon (especially since its effective level is my level, making it a smaller jump). Then I load it up with Ioun stones that increase constitution, and give it my luck stone, making it so the new gold dragon couldn't fail a system shock roll. And then I spent a lot of time (before the game) casting Haste on it.

How old do you want your Gold Dragon familiar to be?Very nice! Still vulnerable to the lowly Dispel Magic, though. But at least your familiar will have magic resistance and a luck stone to resist the attempt. :smallamused: And if it fails, you can just polymorph it back. Assuming it doesn't die of old age when returned to its normal form...

I'll have to remember this one.

[LibraryOgre]

Very nice! Still vulnerable to the lowly Dispel Magic, though. But at least your familiar will have magic resistance and a luck stone to resist the attempt. :smallamused: And if it fails, you can just polymorph it back. Assuming it doesn't die of old age when returned to its normal form...

I'll have to remember this one.

It isn't, is the best part. Once they become the creature, the only thing that undoes it is a wish (or, one assumes, another polymorph and a change of THAT mind).

[Lord Torath]

So what sensory bonus does a gold dragon familiar give? I've got an elven fighter mage with a owl (night vision equals human daylight vision, superior hearing) and a longbow (I own the underdark!), and a human wild mage with a bat (auto detect invisibility via sonar out to 50 yards - also sees through most illusions).

[LibraryOgre]

So what sensory bonus does a gold dragon familiar give? I've got an elven fighter mage with a owl (night vision equals human daylight vision, superior hearing) and a longbow (I own the underdark!), and a human wild mage with a bat (auto detect invisibility via sonar out to 50 yards - also sees through most illusions).

The main benefit, of course, is "My buddy is a gold dragon." ;-)

[Thrudd]

Since when can you have a gold dragon as a familiar? Are you Bahamut? Do you mean a pseudo-dragon? I think it's more likely you'd be the familiar of the gold dragon.

[LibraryOgre]

Since when can you have a gold dragon as a familiar? Are you Bahamut? Do you mean a pseudo-dragon? I think it's more likely you'd be the familiar of the gold dragon.

You missed the "Start with a familiar that you then polymorph" part?

[hamlet]

Maybe I'm just a jerk DM, but really, there's no way I'd allow that to happen exactly as described. I know, according to the rules it works, but still, it rubs me the wrong way.

However, I would not disallow it if permitted to mess with it a bit. Say, a huge gold dragon with the personality of a house cat . . . That's some scratching post.

[Grumm]

More questions:
What are the favored methods of stat generation? 2e tends to be lower-power than later editions, I understand, but 3d6 in order for all stats still seems a trifle harsh. Or do people just do it by the book?

I do 3d6 in order, but you may reroll your character if your two highest stats do not add up to 30 or more. It's a nice way to make sure each PC has both some high stats and some low stats (i.e. strengths and weaknesses).

If I have a first-time player, though, I let them reroll their character as much as they want until they are happy (I usually sit them in front of the AD&D rules CD because the dice roller program is quicker than rolling actual dice).

[LibraryOgre]

I do 3d6 in order, but you may reroll your character if your two highest stats do not add up to 30 or more.

I have not seen that particular iteration before. I like it.

[hamlet]

I do 3d6 in order, but you may reroll your character if your two highest stats do not add up to 30 or more. It's a nice way to make sure each PC has both some high stats and some low stats (i.e. strengths and weaknesses).


Interesting. It would lead to a character that was good at one thing at least thus avoiding the "commoner syndrome" so many folks feel the first time they play since AD&D tends to have, overall, lower numbers I think.

I like it and might filch it.

Though I will say, now and then, I get the urge to really go straight back to 3d6 down the line, take what you get and own it. It can lead to some really interesting things, like a cleric of Tyr with a 5 CON that lasted through 5 levels on the front lines of battle. Fellow was paranoid about getting the best armor he could and carried around a pavise just because.

[MeeposFire]

Interesting. It would lead to a character that was good at one thing at least thus avoiding the "commoner syndrome" so many folks feel the first time they play since AD&D tends to have, overall, lower numbers I think.

I like it and might filch it.

Though I will say, now and then, I get the urge to really go straight back to 3d6 down the line, take what you get and own it. It can lead to some really interesting things, like a cleric of Tyr with a 5 CON that lasted through 5 levels on the front lines of battle. Fellow was paranoid about getting the best armor he could and carried around a pavise just because.

I have enjoyed doing that though I will say this really only works in pre-3e D&D very well especially AD&D since most ability scores do not significantly affect you in combat. It takes some very high or low ability score rolls to even make any difference in many cases and some ability scores do very little for many classes. Let us use the fighter for example.

Str- Honestly unless you get an 18 it really does not matter much. Even at 17 a +1 to hit and damage is just not that great so really having an average score here is no big deal (need a 9 of course just to be the fighter though).

dex- needs a 15 to start seeing a difference in most cases and higher is needed to see major differences.

Con-can make a big difference as I recall if you do die though most rolls will not change most of your living characteristics most of the time. Needs a 15 to start making really noticeable differences in a living character.

Int- surprisingly this has some variance. If you do not play with lots of proficiencies and/or you do not allow the bonus languages apply to getting those proficiencies then this score almost does not matter outside of roleplay, however if you do play with those attributes then int is a GREAT stat for a fighter and can be among the most beneficial to have at least at average or higher levels. Even with an average roll it can make a big difference for you.

Wisdom- NOt much here for a fighter. So long as it is close to average you will not get any big affects outside of roleplay of course.

Cha- Once again no big affects outside of roleplay unless you use followers and the like heavily and even then average is fine.


In AD&D having close to average ability scores on many classes are not a big deal and if it was not for the restrictions on high level spells then having the highest ability scores would not be really needed at all (granted you would still want them of course but you would not NEED them as much).

[hamlet]

That's the thing, attribute dependence is just not really a thing in pre-3e D&D. Even BECMI didn't suffer from it too much.

Sure, it was nice to, now and then, have a high attribute and make you a little better at something, but in the end, it didn't do a lot to improve your effectiveness or survivability. That all depended on you, the player, rather than your character. That, I think, is a serious disconnect between the editions over the years.

[Thrudd]

That's the thing, attribute dependence is just not really a thing in pre-3e D&D. Even BECMI didn't suffer from it too much.

Sure, it was nice to, now and then, have a high attribute and make you a little better at something, but in the end, it didn't do a lot to improve your effectiveness or survivability. That all depended on you, the player, rather than your character. That, I think, is a serious disconnect between the editions over the years.

Well, there was attribute dependence in a more literal sense - you had minimum required attributes to qualify for the different classes. There was also an XP bonus for having a high enough score in the class' main attribute or attributes. The basic four only required a 9 in one attribute, but you needed a 15 or more to get +10% XP award. Rangers required two 13's and two 14's. A paladin needed a 17, a 13, a 12 and two 9's. Druids needed a 15 and a 12, etc.

There were far fewer bonuses applied for scores, characters often had no extra attack or damage or saving throw bonuses from abilities - in actual play they were less relevant overall. They were primarily relevant for determining what your character is.

There were some exceptions, though - intelligence made a huge difference for a magic user - you needed as high as possible because it would restrict how many spells per level you could have in your book and dictated the chance that you could understand any given spell -yes, that means a MU did not automatically get to add any spell they wanted/found to their spell book, even the free one that you get at each level - you had to roll to see if you could understand it first. If you couldn't understand it, well then you will never know that spell unless something somehow increases your intelligence which would let you re-check (which will be a very rare occurrence). High wisdom was also more important for clerics, beyond just meeting the minimum - you got bonus spells per day with higher wisdom, which is a huge boost - and mediocre wisdom gave you a chance for your spells to fail instead. That's right - any time you cast a spell there would be a roll with a small chance that it would just not work - your god says "nope".

[thorr-kan]

High wisdom was also more important for clerics, beyond just meeting the minimum - you got bonus spells per day with higher wisdom, which is a huge boost - and mediocre wisdom gave you a chance for your spells to fail instead. That's right - any time you cast a spell there would be a roll with a small chance that it would just not work - your god says "nope".
"I find your lack of faith disturbing."

Not that big a deal, but it has come up a few times in our Al-Qadim campaign. It adds quite a bit of tension when the priests *really* need to get a spell off.

[VoxRationis]

When a monster has multiple treasure types listed (like Treasure: A, B, C), is it A+B+C or 'pick one from A, B, and C'?

[Lord Torath]

When a monster has multiple treasure types listed (like Treasure: A, B, C), is it A+B+C or 'pick one from A, B, and C'?A+B+C. Some monsters even have Ax3, Bx2, Qx10. Multiply the amount indicated in the treasure type by 3, 2, or 10 (or whatever the multiplier is).

[Grumm]

Interesting. It would lead to a character that was good at one thing at least thus avoiding the "commoner syndrome" so many folks feel the first time they play since AD&D tends to have, overall, lower numbers I think.

I like it and might filch it.

Though I will say, now and then, I get the urge to really go straight back to 3d6 down the line, take what you get and own it. It can lead to some really interesting things, like a cleric of Tyr with a 5 CON that lasted through 5 levels on the front lines of battle. Fellow was paranoid about getting the best armor he could and carried around a pavise just because.

Please do, that is exactly how it is meant to work and it does it quite well (i.e. being good at one thing and thus having a niche for your character in the party). I really like characters to have "5's" and "8's" and "11's" in their stat line... makes them seem more mortal.

I use 3D6 straight down when I play OD&D (well, Blueholme, which is a retroclone of Holmes Basic which is itself a revision of OD&D).

[VoxRationis]

How does one decide how much treasure to allocate outside of encounters? I see occasional references in the book to how even lair treasures aren't what you're supposed to stock dungeon rooms with, but I don't see tables or even vague guidelines for what a dungeon should include on average.

[LibraryOgre]

How does one decide how much treasure to allocate outside of encounters? I see occasional references in the book to how even lair treasures aren't what you're supposed to stock dungeon rooms with, but I don't see tables or even vague guidelines for what a dungeon should include on average.

Generally, I go with the monsters in the dungeon, and spread their stuff around. So, if a monster SOMEWHERE is supposed to give a +3 sword, I put the sword somewhere in the dungeon. Often, where the monster has access to it, or nearby, but I might stick the occasional odd item somewhere else.

Mostly, I try to keep what's out there to the available risk. If I set a trap in the dungeon, I also like to make sure it has some appropriate treasure, too.