"You've been so concerned about his Vulcan eyes, doctor, you've forgotten about his Vulcan ears." - More from the DMG

More Points of interest from the DMG

On Listening at Doors

"Keen-eared individuals will gain a bonus of 1 or 2 in 20 (5% or 10%). Use chance of hearing a noise to determine if a character is keen-eared the first time he or she listens at a door, and if it is indicated, tell the player to note the fact for his or her character."   The DMG - Page 60.

I think that's a neat idea. Screw all this Listen Skill crap! You're either keen eared, or you're not and most likely you ain't!

On Detecting Evil (Eeeevilll!)

"It is important to make a distinction between character alignment and some powerful force of evil or good when this detection function is considered. In general, only a Know Alignment spell will determine the evil or good a character holds within. It must be a great evil or a strong good to be detected. Characters who are very strongly aligned, do not stray from their faith, and who are relatively high level (at least 8th or higher) might radiate evil or good if they are intent upon appropriate actions."  The DMG - Page 60. 

I don't remember how I used to rule this and didn't remember the exact ruling on the subject, either. The stereotype of the Paladin, marching about detecting evil on everyone and everything, comes to mind. I don't think I've ever had a Paladin PC in any of my games.

I'm getting ready to start on page 61 - Combat! Woo-hoo! Deep down, I knew that reading the DMG would make me want to run the game. I'll decide about that, sometime this week. For now, I'm reading the DMG during breaks at work and the Forgotten Realms Grey Box in the evening. I have an idea for a campaign set in the Dalelands, forming in my mind. On the other hand, over the weekend I won an ebay auction for the City System. Combined with my copy of FR1, I'll be all set for kicking things off in Waterdeep!

Blinded By The Light - My DMG Journey Continues

After getting sidetracked...

I'm now on page 50, having just finished the section on Spell Explanations and moved on into  The Adventure (Land Adventures.)

The Spell Explanations section gives further rules for adjudicating select Spells. They seem to be a mixture of Mr. Gygax deciding some things needed to be expounded upon for DM's (and the knowledge kept from players) and, I would think, Rulings he came up with and passed along, from actual play experience.

"Earthquake: ... An earth elemental in the spell area has the effect of negating 10% to 100% of the spell effects (d10,0 +100%) if the elemental is of forces opposed to the cleric casting the earthquake spell."

I'd like to think that a player came up with that one and Gary thought it a good enough idea, to incorporate into the notes on  the spell. Or, that he used it to screw up a player's plans. The notion of either event, makes me smile.

Here's one, which my early gaming group found rather early and used quite frenquently:

"Light: It should be noted that if this spell is cast upon the visage or before the visual organs of a creature, it will tend to blind it (rather as if a strong light were placed before its eyes), and its attacks and defenses will be a -4 on "to hit", saving throw, and even armor class. Note also that the spell is not mobile, although it can be cast upon a movable or mobile object or creature."

Pretty damn nifty, for a 1st level utility spell, huh? The Player's Handbook doesn't mention the possibility of Blinding, but does state that if the spell is cast upon a creature, said victim receives a Saving Throw to avoid having the spell manifest upon it. There are several instances, where Mr. Gygax makes sure to tell the DM that he shouldn't let the Player's in on all their options, but rather to bloody well make them figure it out for themselves.

There are some Rulings in this section, which I don't care for. Like the Heal spell not curing Mental Illnesses.

Alas, there's only a handful of Illusionist spells, explicated more fully. I wonder how many Illusionist's Gary DM'd?

The DMG has been, thus far, filled with good advice, excellent ideas and useful information. But, I'm left with the feeling that Gary is doing too much of my imagining for me.

Surprise!!! You're Scewed!

So, both sides roll a d6 for Surprise. On a 1 or 2, you're surprised for the number of segments you rolled, minus any segments of Surprise on the other side. If there's a Ranger in your party, you're only Surprised on a 1 in 6. Unless a monster has a special Surprise vs. opponents. Say, a Lurker Above who Surprises on 1-4 in 6. With a ranger in your party, he'll only Surprise on a 1-3. If you roll a four and he rolls higher than a 2, you'll be Surprised for 3 segments. If you have a Ranger. Otherwise, you'll be staring agog with your thumb up your ass for 4 segments. Why is this a big deal?

It's only a really big deal, if the monster is close enough to attack. Like a Lurker Above, who would probably just drop on you. In AD&D, he'll get his full attack action, each segment the party is Surprised! The Lurker only does 1-6 in damage, but I might could still kill the MU. Imagine a foe, who does more damage and has multiple attacks, getting 4 such full attack opportunities. Or, multiple monsters.

Reaction adjustments do help, but only for individual PC's. So, your Thief probably will recover fairly quickly and manage to close with the Lurker, thus saving the MU's sorry butt. Unless, you know, he takes that opportunity to filch some treasure, or something.

All in all, when dealing with an encounter where a Surprising monster is close enough to engage, multiple segments of attack are just too much! Unless the party is maybe eating dinner or otherwise engaged in really casual pursuits, I just don't see a battle-hardened, experienced Adventurer, being flat footed for 40 seconds. Or, even 20. Personally, unless special circumstances were involved, I wouldn't allow more than 1 segment of unanswered, full attack action from a Surprising monster.

Pawns of the Gods: The DMG Cover To Cover

I'm now in the middle of page 34, having taken the Dungeon Master's Guide to work today, to read during my lunch hour. 

Alignment Languages

I never used alignment languages in AD&D. They always seemed unnecessary and far-fetched. But, this passage gave me a reason to reconsider the issue:

"Alignment language is a handy game tool which is not unjustifiable in real terms. Thieves did employ a special cant. Secret organizations and societies did and do have certain recognition signs, signals, and recognition phrases - possibly special languages (of limited extent) as well." Dungeon Masters Guide - page 24.

True enough and if we assume a milieu with real gods, which have a direct impact on the day-to-day affairs of mortals and mortal society, then this sort of social interaction is, indeed, plausible. And this is the sort of campaign, which Mr. Gygax is envisioning for AD&D:

"Whether or not the character actively professes some deity, he or she will have an alignment and serve one or more deities of this general alignment indirectly and unbeknownst to the character."  Dungeon Masters Guide - page 25.

As described by the author, these languages are limited in scope, mainly dealing with matters directly related to the ethos they serve. Seen in this light and in a culture so heavily influenced by the gods, Alignment Languages don't seem so ridiculous, at all. If you're still not on board, imagine two Religious Fundamentalists having an in-depth theological discussion. Or, better yet, two Hermetic Qabalists. Even better, two Physicists. If you're not into the same thing, you might understand some of it and may be able to identify their "alignment," but a lot of the terminology and meaning would go right over your head.

Other highlights, include:

• Hirelings, lackeys, men-at-arms and how much they'll set you back! And a pseudo NPC Class: The Sage. 
• Mr. Gygax has done a lot of work on the AD&D economy. It would be worth while, using it, even if I run S&W instead.
• If a player wants to run a Monster PC, he's probably just being a power-gaming dick. It is to be discouraged. 
• The Weapons vs. AC table is for actual armor only, save for in special cases. It is also an optional rule.

I never used that table and didn't remember if Gary considered it an optional rule, or not. Now, I won't feel bad about ditching it the next time I run AD&D. :)

Reading the DMG Cover-To-Cover

On Page 19 and Counting

Over the years, I've probably read all, or almost all of the DMG. Never straight through, though. Sunday, I took that tome from my shelves and began reading it, cover-to-cover. I'm not planning to blog a blow by blow description. Just a few highlights and things that strike my fancy.

For instance, has anyone, anywhere, ever had a character actually die from old age. Natural old age? I love that Gary writes this section, as if we should expect just that! I've had characters of players reach middle-age in my Kastmaria campaign, but that included a few time hand-waves. The characters were semi-retired Movers and Shakers at that point. "Allright, it's been five years, since..."

The Disease and Infection rules, are nicely done. They cover all the bases and separate everything into types of disorders, rather than going with specific diseases. That way, the Barber's in your campaign, can label a collection of symptoms, however they please. :)

I've seen people in forums, not Old School ones, of course, criticize Gary for his section on Dice. Of course, they probably didn't actually Read it and just checked out when they saw the words "Bell Curve." Although I've never done it, I like the idea of setting up a Random Table, using a Bell Curve to manipulate the probabilities. I rather enjoyed this whole section, more than I expected to.

Man, I'd forgotten just how information rich, this book is.

A Few More Highlights:

• A Ranger has a shot of getting a Copper Dragon as a follower! Maximum Age Category: 5.
• Holy Shit! A Slightly Slippery Surface doubles the chances of a Thief slipping and falling, when climbing walls. Gary informs us that Most Dungeon walls, should be considered slightly slippery! Now, I always added modifiers I felt appropriate, but it never occurred to me to consider most Dungeon Walls as Slightly Slippery. I did always think, that the Thieves CW percentage was a little high, right of the bat, though, so I'm pleased with the idea.
• Mr. Gygax's writing, has thus far been executed with quite an impressive degree, of clarity and precision. 
• Gary recommends taking it a little easy on new Players, during their first level. You know, give em a chance to get a real taste of and for the game, before taking them to Old School. 

So, Am I Going To Run AD&D?

I think I have my initial group of players corralled and if I get my butt in gear, could be ready to go in about three weeks. That includes taking care of a few things not directly gaming related, which need to happen first. 

Which means, it'll probably take me about five weeks to get things off the ground. 

I really like LL, but for some reason it isn't quite scratching my itch, the way I want it scratched. I've been pouring over various versions of the game for the past few weeks and spent much of the weekend studying combat and XP progression charts. I have a house-ruled S&W set-up, fairly well planned out in my mind. I know what I want to do in that direction and where I want to go. 

The other direction is to run AD&D. That plan, fits a little better with a couple of other things I have cooking and ties in rather neatly, with a recent ebay acquisition.