[2E] Energy Drain... I'm thinking not.

[quillbreaker]

I was playing in a second edition game until recently, specifically, last session. My character got hit with ye olde Level Drain. I sat and thought about it, decided it wasn't fun, and left.

I don't understand how anyone - ever - thought this mechanic was fun. A brief sketch of the numbers involved indicated that I lost 3 to 4 sessions of experience on one roll of the die. I rolled an 8 on the HP loss from losing the fighter level, meaning that I lost substantially more hit points than I am likely to gain back. Do second edition games usually consist of a bunch of players trying to trick each other into being the front liner? I can't see it going any other way. I certainly can't see my character continuing to carry his sword and shield into the fray.

It's a bit rude of me to just leave in the middle of a session, I know, but I'm just not masochistic enough to want to play a game where monsters wielding nerf bats pop up and beat your character until he's a novice again. Why would you want to do that to your players?

[Matthew]

It just means you have a different orientation to people who play AD&D, putting greater importance on gaining levels as a major sign that you are having fun (and conversely consider losing levels to be detrimental to your fun). If you go into melee against creatures capable of energy drain, expect to lose levels. It is better then your character getting killed, but then I have a feeling you might have walked if that had happened too (since that would constitute losing all the levels you gained through play), in which case you certainly are not cut out to play AD&D.

[aaron_the_cow]

Energy Drain is a 9th level spell and in all the games I've played, the highest level PC is 15th level (and Bad-Ass). It should be a very rare spell because it drains an entire level, withch at 9+ take more than an adventure. If yous are a high level group, you should have at least a +3 shield or a similar amount of defence in cloakes of displacement and rings of protection. Making it hard for the mage (at least Lvl. 18 so a THACO of 17?) to make the touch atack against you, but nat 20's happen.
If you are low level and up somting that can cast Energy Drain, then your DM wasn't waiting befor leting lose the big guns.

[imperialspectre]

Or, you know, vampire.

But seriously, man, you should probably play 4E or something like that. It doesn't look like you particularly enjoy a more lethal kind of system, so finding a group that plays a less dangerous kind of game might suit your tastes better. Different strokes, you know.

[Vazzaroth]

2nd ed... reverse math THACO?! MAH BRAIN!

But really, there was progress for a reason. I'm sure 2nd is nice in it's own ways, and I'm sure those ways appeal to certain people more than others, but we don't make computers using vacuum tubes anymore much like most people don't play 2nd (and more and more, 3rd). Sure, the novelty of the old stuff is interesting, but I totally agree, I've hated losing progress in every RPG I've ever played. Wether it is Final Fantasy and quitting 1/2 way through FF7 after dying to a boss after not saving for 3 hours (And pretty much every FF I've played has the same outcome eventually), or losing XP from player death in DnD, Losing progress is incredibly demoralizing for me. I'd rather just roll a new character and have new experiences (Or get a new game.) than re-live the same levels.

[quillbreaker]

If you go into melee against creatures capable of energy drain, expect to lose levels.

Half of the undead in the game have a description of "a gnarled, hideous figure with claws". Ghouls, and ghasts, and wights. The third will ruin your day. There was no way I could have known, and even if I did know it was right on the other side of a door.

It is better then your character getting killed, but then I have a feeling you might have walked if that had happened too (since that would constitute losing all the levels you gained through play), in which case you certainly are not cut out to play AD&D.

I've changed characters for all sorts of reasons, mostly IC, sometimes for death, and usually handled it with a chuckle. But who wants to see the character they were playing turn into a withered husk who is now barely capable of doing the job they used to do? Kinder to kill them. They can be raised out of that if you can scrounge the funds, or they can get a clean start with another character if they're game to that.

But, yes, not my cup of tea.

Has anyone house-ruled permanent level drain back in to 3rd or 4th?

[The Glyphstone]

It's already there - any negative levels in 3E require a Fort save to avoid becoming permanent if they last for 24 hours or more. Enervation and Energy Drain are too short duration as spells, but the slam attacks of a wight/vampire/other undead can ruin anyone's day if they don't get a Restoration quick enough.

[Matthew]

Half of the undead in the game have a description of "a gnarled, hideous figure with claws". Ghouls, and ghasts, and wights. The third will ruin your day. There was no way I could have known, and even if I did know it was right on the other side of a door.

Sounds like some bad tactical choices to me, but even if you make a good decision every time, wandering into a tomb full of undead carries the risk of getting level drained.

I've changed characters for all sorts of reasons, mostly IC, sometimes for death, and usually handled it with a chuckle. But who wants to see the character they were playing turn into a withered husk who is now barely capable of doing the job they used to do? Kinder to kill them. They can be raised out of that if you can scrounge the funds, or they can get a clean start with another character if they're game to that.

I think you are over dramaticising things, you only lost one level. What level was your character anyway? The way experience is gained in AD&D it is unlikely you would be behind for long, even if reduced to level one. If experience is awarded for treasure (default rule in first edition, optional rule in second edition) there is even a compensation mechanism explicitly in the hands of the players.

But, yes, not my cup of tea.

Indeed.

Has anyone house-ruled permanent level drain back in to 3rd or 4th?

I have heard of it in D20/3e, not in D20/4e though; too different, I think.

[JadedDM]

Of course level-draining is not fun. That's the point. Just like dying isn't fun, either. But it's part of the game. There's no fun at all in winning all of the time. If there's no risk at all, there's no joy in winning. Imagine playing a game of Monopoly where you never have to go to jail, pay fines, or lose money. What's the point then?

That's why when I'm watching a movie or tv show and the main character is shown in danger, I don't worry. I don't fear they'll die. I know they'll live, because they always do. If I was watching a show by Joss Whedon, though, and he put one of his characters in danger (particularly one beloved by the fans who had just found true love and happiness), I'd be freaking out!

Besides, like Matthew said, just one level? Is that really such a big deal? What if he had died and you had to start over completely?

[Vazzaroth]

There is a difference between not fun and challenging... and unfair and depressing.

Getting to low HP and almost dying, or coming back from the brink of death is challenging and, maybe not at the time, fun in the long run. Challenge is the meat of the game just like conflict is the key to entertainment.

But Un-doing time spent is thoroughly unfair, IMO.

[Matthew]

There is a difference between not fun and challenging... and unfair and depressing.

Getting to low HP and almost dying, or coming back from the brink of death is challenging and, maybe not at the time, fun in the long run. Challenge is the meat of the game just like conflict is the key to entertainment.

But Un-doing time spent is thoroughly unfair, IMO.

I think you would need to radically adjust your thinking to see the threat of level drain and death as a challenging and fun element of the game. Level drain is what makes powerful undead a serious threat, and a difficult challenge to overcome.

[Vazzaroth]

It's not the threat level I have an issue with its the fact that level drain is like saying "Hey, you know those last 5 hours you spent playing? They mean nothing."

I didn't mine 3.5's level drain, basically a global -1, but I definitely am glad it's more or less gone in 4th.

[Matthew]

It's not the threat level I have an issue with its the fact that level drain is like saying "Hey, you know those last 5 hours you spent playing? They mean nothing."

I didn't mine 3.5's level drain, basically a global -1, but I definitely am glad it's more or less gone in 4th.

This is why you would need to readjust your thinking. If you are playing AD&D "to level up" and the acquiring of experience points is what gives your participation in the game meaning, rather than the adventure itself, it is little wonder that losing those experience points (however temporarily) is unacceptable to you.

It sounds like you want a risk free challenge, which as far as I can see is no challenge at all.

[quillbreaker]

This is why you would need to readjust your thinking. If you are playing AD&D "to level up" and the acquiring of experience points is what gives your participation in the game meaning, rather than the adventure itself, it is little wonder that losing those experience points (however temporarily) is unacceptable to you.

It sounds like you want a risk free challenge, which as far as I can see is no challenge at all.

Objecting to a character-destruction mechanic doesn't mean that I want a "risk free challenge". I'm willing to risk death. It means that I don't find being crippled next to the rest of the party to be an acceptable consequence for failure.

[Weezer]

It's not the threat level I have an issue with its the fact that level drain is like saying "Hey, you know those last 5 hours you spent playing? They mean nothing."

They only mean nothing if you didn't have fun playing for those 5 hours. D&D of all editions is primarily about the experience and enjoyment, not character levels.

[Tsotha-lanti]

In several years of playing AD&D 2nd ed., I never once used anything that caused level drain (including vampires, wraiths, wights, etc.), or anything that caused aging (such as, you know, ghosts), because both mechanics were ridiculously bad and awkward, and not even remotely fun. (In the Gold Box AD&D games, being hit with level drain - and it's damn common - tends to result in me Quicking the fight and reloading, which takes freaking forever. At least healing at temples is free in Death Knights.)

Admittedly, losing a level in 3.X is even worse, because the changes between levels are much more extensive and complicated. At least in 2nd ed. you just have to reduce your HP, look up your saves on a different column, and maybe change your THAC0. (Nobody at our table ever once played a spellcaster. Go figure. Might've been because half the spells age you, too.)

It's not like it's even lethal. Old RuneQuest is lethal, where a critical hit to your head is more likely to kill you than not. Losing levels is just annoying and frustrating.

Of course level-draining is not fun. That's the point.

Say what?

Someone intentionally decided to put something that's meant to be un-fun in a game?

That's just twisted, and completely misses the point of it being a game.

[kjones]

This pretty much sums up my feelings on level drain in 2E.

Sure, it's not a game about leveling up, and sure, you could have avoided it by taking the proper precautions, but still... it sucks to lose a level.

And losing one level is bad enough... if you go up against (say) a spectre, expect to lose more than that. Then your friends are Level Awesome and you're Level Stupid. That sucks too.

[Tsotha-lanti]

And losing one level is bad enough... if you go up against (say) a spectre, expect to lose more than that. Then your friends are Level Awesome and you're Level Stupid. That sucks too.

This, seriously. In AD&D, fighting a vampire is insane, because by the end you'll be half the level you used to be. Fighting something like wights or wraiths (or spectres - or did they age you instead?), who tend to show up in groups, is even crazier.

Both really pale in comparison to the sheer lunacy of trying to fight a ghost or other undead creature with an aging attack. 1-2 attacks will kill humans.

The Game Of Instant, Unavoidable Death.

Yay.

[Behold_the_Void]

This, seriously. In AD&D, fighting a vampire is insane, because by the end you'll be half the level you used to be. Fighting something like wights or wraiths (or spectres - or did they age you instead?), who tend to show up in groups, is even crazier.

Both really pale in comparison to the sheer lunacy of trying to fight a ghost or other undead creature with an aging attack. 1-2 attacks will kill humans.

The Game Of Instant, Unavoidable Death.

Yay.

Indeed. I posit that there's a definite difference between making something challenging and making something frustrating. These mechanics I tend to view as the latter, not the former. Especially since it seems pretty prevalent. From what I can tell, the only way to not get screwed over like that is to never fight undead ever, and I know a lot of DMs (myself included) like to make use of undead. So when a popular enemy is going to pretty much unequivocally gank your character permanently, the game loses a lot of appeal.

And I would not say it's an issue of wanting to horde exp and whatnot. I see it as more of an issue of an encounter that strips you (and only you) of some of your more valuable abilities or items, whereas your party remains virtually unharmed. I don't think I've ever found myself thinking a situation was fun where I was exclusively getting ganked and everyone else was not, and it sounds like that's pretty much the case if you're a melee character who wants to fight undead.

[Tempest Fennac]

How did the ageing attacks work exactly? I have to agree with the idea that perminant level drain isn't fun (it's fine if it only lasts for a short while, but I tend to see losing progress like that to just be demoralizing).

[Kurald Galain]

Three words: Negative Plane Protection.

Seriously though, me and any 2E DM I know in the area have always changed the rule to some ability score drain that recovers over the next few hours, or aging the characters since that's mostly flavor anyway (without ye olde systeme schocke, that is).

[Tempest Fennac]

How was aging relegated to only being flavour in your games, Kurald? I know there were ageing penalties in the 2nd Edition which weren't as harsh as the 3rd Edition rules.

[JadedDM]

Say what?

Someone intentionally decided to put something that's meant to be un-fun in a game?

That's just twisted, and completely misses the point of it being a game.

Oh, man--have you ever played Monopoly? If you get sent to jail, and don't even get me started on how unfun that is, you cannot pass Go AND can't collect $200! What is this madness? I hope someone got fired for that one!

Seriously, this kind of attitude worries me. There are supposed to be bad things in any game that the player(s) try to avoid. Death, level-drain, curses, and so forth when it comes to D&D.

I have no idea what 5E will be like, but I'm willing to bet that 6E will consist of nothing but everyone sitting down at a table, and the DM handing out gold and XP until everyone gets bored and decides to do something else instead.

And losing one level is bad enough... if you go up against (say) a spectre, expect to lose more than that. Then your friends are Level Awesome and you're Level Stupid. That sucks too.

Then you really shouldn't try and tackle a spectre by yourself (unless you are proposing some strange scenario where the spectre touches you and you only and leaves the rest of the party alone?)

In AD&D, fighting a vampire is insane, because by the end you'll be half the level you used to be.

I had a party in one of my games face a vampire and not loose a single level. That's because they changed their tactics and made sure not to just run at it, swords drawn, like they would anything else.

[Kantur]

My main AD&D DM didn't like the level drain mechanic by the book either, something about being thousands upon thousands of XP less than the rest of the party and never really having a chance to catch up...

So, his housrule is still nasty, still makes us think twice about going toe-to-toe with undead that we think might drain levels, but isn't as bad, especially not at higher levels.
Houserule: Level drain makes you lose 500*Level experience.
So a first level character who's close to second level wouldn't die outright, a 4th level character still loses 2000 XP, a 7th level character loses 3500 XP. And if you do lose a level from it, it's suddenly not as bad; yes you have less hit points and a, possibly, lower THAC0 and your class abilities aren't as good, but you're now losing less XP from each drain.

[Behold_the_Void]

Oh, man--have you ever played Monopoly? If you get sent to jail, and don't even get me started on how unfun that is, you cannot pass Go AND can't collect $200! What is this madness? I hope someone got fired for that one!

Seriously, this kind of attitude worries me. There are supposed to be bad things in any game that the player(s) try to avoid. Death, level-drain, curses, and so forth when it comes to D&D.

There's bad and there's crippling. Going to jail in Monopoly isn't a huge penalty, it can even be something of a boon in the later game if you've played your cards right. This mechanic completely screws any character unlucky or unaware enough to be hit by it. Irrevocably. In a game that can go on for months if not years. How is this a good idea?

[Project_Mayhem]

My players survived an undead heavy module by sending the hireling bond-warrior-people-things in first. Not in a rushy, suicidal way - just that they were doing the meatshielding, while the players struck the vulnerable points.

I always found that undead in general require special tactics. IIRC even a ghoul can paralise you and then rip your head off.

[Kurald Galain]

How was aging relegated to only being flavour in your games, Kurald?

Because unless you fight undead all the time (which we really didn't), aging attacks of one-year-per-hit are not going to advance any character to the next age category.

Well, as a DM I did have one character age to death once, but that was because he was using a cursed item that he refused to get rid of despite numerous hints that it was bad for him.

[Heliomance]

Of course level-draining is not fun. That's the point. Just like dying isn't fun, either. But it's part of the game. There's no fun at all in winning all of the time. If there's no risk at all, there's no joy in winning. Imagine playing a game of Monopoly where you never have to go to jail, pay fines, or lose money. What's the point then?

Hey, going to jail is good in the end-game. You don't have to pay rent, but you still get to collect it.

[Tempest Fennac]

I can see why you did that, Kurald. Was there any way to reverse ageing attacks in 2nd Edition? I know Haste was a poor spell choice back then due to it ageing you by 1 year whenever it was used.

[Charity]

The rules on energy drain were changed in 3e and 4e due to player sentiments much like the one professed by the OP.
If you don't like/ appreciate their place within a game I'd advise steering clear of the early editions, it is not the only example of harsh mechanics.

I can see why you did that, Kurald. Was there any way to reverse ageing attacks in 2nd Edition? I know Haste was a poor spell choice back then due to it ageing you by 1 year whenever it was used.

Haste was an excellent spell choice, it was a very useful spell, and being old was no bad thing for a magicuser or cleric. Heck if you were an elf you'd barely even notice.