|
|
Post by robkuntz on Mar 28, 2016 12:40:32 GMT -5
I play a tough game, so if you survive you deserve it. If you die it is not because I imbalanced things, it's just that you've got to learn. D&D is a series of learning curves; and one of the primary ones, the primary one to me, is learning how not to be killed.  |
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Mar 28, 2016 12:53:35 GMT -5
Why are 1st level PCs in the wilderness anyway?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2016 12:54:17 GMT -5
Because the Dungeon is not in town ...
|
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Mar 28, 2016 12:56:18 GMT -5
Perhaps DMs should start running pre-game tactical stunts for new players rather than trying to offset something that is learned by giving more hps, which seems to me to admit that PCs/players need time to acclimate and that one doesn't want them dying before that occurs. This, IMO, is not the correct route for making people aware, but YMMV. So, you are saying I'm doing it wrong. I don't know how to make players any more aware of a gargoyle pack chasing their 1st level characters - actually happened with a random wilderness roll and ended badly for everyone involved. I could have changed the encounter, I guess, but I try to stay neutral as a referee. If we walk into the woods, we might encounter deer or a squirrel - which we can deal with; or we might encounter a bear or a pack of wolves - which we cannot. Tossing rations at bears or wolves may or may not work, depending on whether the animals detect the offering. I thought I had a pretty good grip on tactics, at least on par with the players, for sure. Are you saying there should be a qualifying training level for new and even old players? Hypothetical scenarios to force them to embrace better tactics? I just want to understand/learn ... No, not wrong. no where near it. It is not what I consider the correct route for learning tactical exercises, giving more hp. Most player death as I have noted over the years has either been through 1) very poor judgment/in-game decisions, 2) from unbalanced encounters, or 3) purely from bad luck of the dice. #1 and #2 can be rectified. I can use fiat, on the spot, if I have made a mistake and brought apparent doom upon the group; I can even wipe it clean if the dice are going too far south during a session (ask Gronan about being repeatedly trapped in a dead end by wandering monsters). As for the last question--I dunno. I don't know your group, I have never played with you or them, so what I was suggesting was that if the shoe fits, using tactical preparation tests, then use it, if you feel that would groom them better. Otherwise carry on, as what I say is good for me alone and is only a passing reflection otherwise, which is why I stated that YMMV. |
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Mar 28, 2016 12:59:11 GMT -5
Because the Dungeon is not in town ... Well, there's a good enough reason for giving extra hp. Perhaps they should be starting at higher levels too? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2016 13:06:26 GMT -5
3rd level seemed like a good starting place, for my group. Enough hit points to survive a few melees, a couple of healing spells, Thief skills are a little better, and enough rope to hang a MU if he doesn't play/select spells well. I certainly don't plan on killer encounters in the Wild, but I am constantly warning them of the dangers of the Wild through tavern tales, rumors, and NPC interactions.
|
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Mar 28, 2016 13:08:11 GMT -5
3rd level seemed like a good starting place, for my group. Enough hit points to survive a few melees, a couple of healing spells, Thief skills are a little better, and enough rope to hang a MU if he doesn't play/select spells well. I certainly don't plan on killer encounters in the Wild, but I am constantly warning them of the dangers of the Wild through tavern tales, rumors, and NPC interactions. Sounds like a great pressure cooker that I'd enjoy playing in. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Mar 28, 2016 13:15:39 GMT -5
There is a document floating around the web that I have heard of where someone did not create a clone but just reorganized the text of the 3 LBBs into one document in the format of either Holmes or B/X (or something similar), but did not remove or change anything that makes OD&D special. I have heard that this document was created by someone outside the US and that it is very understandable, and eminently playable from the gitgo. Perhaps it would have taken something like that to have shut the nay-sayers up. I just want to clarify something here - I have not read said document - which of course is not something that can be legally distributed regardless of quality; however, as someone kindly pointed out to me it is not as accurate a copy as I have heard and in fact both adds and changes things from the original documents. I won't bother to go into all the details here, since this can not be passed around anyway. However, it occurs to me that the best of the clones (retro-clones/simulacrums) may be more accurate reproductions even within the confines of the requirements of the OGL. And it should not be illegal for someone (not the author of the retro-clones/simulacrums) to produce a document pointing out the specific differences between OD&D and a specific retro-clone/simulacrum (someone please correct me if I am wrong on this point). Which in turn would allow someone to "correct" or "alter" the retro-clone/simulacrum into virtually an exact but well organized copy of OD&D for use at their own table. On the other hand the 3LBBs* and the supplements* are now available for sale in pdf files on RPGNOW. These have the feature of allowing you to copy past the entire text and paste it into MSWord or other program. Which means if you have a hard copy of the 4th/5th print or if there were a document listing all of the differences between the current available pdfs and the original version of the game you could fully recreate it for your own table by just adding the missing material back in. *(the 2013 versions which are mostly the same as the 6th print OCE editions with a more few references removed which means they are about 98% accurate with the 5th print before the suits got involved.) |
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Mar 28, 2016 13:23:09 GMT -5
Because the Dungeon is not in town ... Didn't mean to come across sounding snarky. I was just trying to jump into the conversation on my phone! I am used to what I take to be the implicit "structure" of the game where levels 1-4 build up in the local and fairly accessible dungeon. Then levels 4-8 are pushed out into the wilderness where they, levels 8+ start establishing strongholds, baronies, etc. Seems to be implicit in some of the introductory material in both M&M and in U&WA. But that said, the whole point of this forum is to say: do it your way and have fun, then report to us how you are making it work for you. Which you are doing! So thanks! robkuntz, yes I see your point about balance with the d4, d6, d8 approach, etc. It does work in its way. And it is really cool that you are the reason why that made its way into Greyhawk, AD&D, etc. I still like the LBB approach, I, like waysoftheearth and others like the way in which 1d6 HD and 1d6 damage affect the systemic structure of the game as a whole. And I like the way skipping levels achieves some of the same balance, without having to roll all those funny little dice! The d20 is funny enough as it is!  Thanks for the convo! |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Mar 28, 2016 13:28:04 GMT -5
Why are 1st level PCs in the wilderness anyway? Bitd before I created the first dungeon after I started reffing (the guy that brought the game to us never did a dungeon) we were mostly in the wilderness to begin with. But we quickly learned a lot of what we could and could not do and what we could and could not fight and we learned not to fight if we could avoid it. In addition, we had at least 12 players every game, but you also have the option of hiring help with a smaller group or the ref can throw in a few npcs with a really small group, etc, My group now tends to alternate back and forth between the wilderness and dungeons and are more and more into exploration the longer we play. Which is really cool since that is not where they started. |
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Mar 29, 2016 3:01:26 GMT -5
3rd level seemed like a good starting place, for my group. Enough hit points to survive a few melees, a couple of healing spells, Thief skills are a little better, and enough rope to hang a MU if he doesn't play/select spells well. I certainly don't plan on killer encounters in the Wild, but I am constantly warning them of the dangers of the Wild through tavern tales, rumors, and NPC interactions. I have given some further thought to this and have a question: Do you use the straight outdoor encounter charts and rules for random wilderness encounters? I ask this because I was forced to come to terms with the hierarchical structuring of low level, to mid level, to assumptive higher+ level play on the planes or outdoor, that is embedded in D&D's structure; and I pretty much jettisoned it for an ad hoc system which leveled the playing field for my own World of Kalibruhn, that is, that allows for adventure in any clime at any level. This perforce required that I use various other ways of introducing content consonant with the party's strengths (but still allowed for the strong wandering or even special encounter THAT SHOULD BE AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS if the party was no where capable of dealing with it; and the latter I covered in similar ways--through legend and rumor, etc.,--as you have done with your players). This system required a long-standing campaign-oriented group of players (regulars), which I had. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2016 7:20:51 GMT -5
Yes, I had used the one in vol3 The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures, but have now switched to Swords and Wizardry Complete's Wilderness Encounter Table, which seems to be roughly based on OD&D's charts and so far hasn't killed anyone - but has certainly challenged them.
Regardless, both charts seem to have a recipe for a bad day ... but I really don't want to move my dungeons closer to town ... so I guess I either have characters start at higher levels or come up with new encounter tables ...
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Mar 29, 2016 8:34:08 GMT -5
I have given some further thought to this and have a question: Do you use the straight outdoor encounter charts and rules for random wilderness encounters? I ask this because I was forced to come to terms with the hierarchical structuring of low level, to mid level, to assumptive higher+ level play on the planes or outdoor, that is embedded in D&D's structure; and I pretty much jettisoned it for an ad hoc system which leveled the playing field for my own World of Kalibruhn, that is, that allows for adventure in any clime at any level. This perforce required that I use various other ways of introducing content consonant with the party's strengths (but still allowed for the strong wandering or even special encounter THAT SHOULD BE AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS if the party was no where capable of dealing with it; and the latter I covered in similar ways--through legend and rumor, etc.,--as you have done with your players). This system required a long-standing campaign-oriented group of players (regulars), which I had. I rarely use any of the straight outdoor encounter charts and rules for random wilderness encounters. I have my own charts for different areas and when they go through a portal into a different world then the charts get created in my head on the fly as we go. I generate encounters of varying levels of difficulty up to and including the special encounter THAT SHOULD BE AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS. I have been known to go the whole game without even glancing at any part of the rules, just tell me what you rolled and I will let you know if you hit or not, in many respects the "Free Kriegspiel" that @gronanofsimmerya refers to. Interestingly I have never had a player comment on or complain about my not checking the tables for anything. When you are fair and when you listen it is not a problem. As Rob said elsewhere, if you make a mistake as the ref, then you fix it. That creates a lot of trust with your players. Characters die and that is overwhelmingly because of bad decisions on their part and my players bitd and currently accept that. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Mar 29, 2016 8:42:45 GMT -5
Yes, I had used the one in vol3 The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures, but have now switched to Swords and Wizardry Complete's Wilderness Encounter Table, which seems to be roughly based on OD&D's charts and so far hasn't killed anyone - but has certainly challenged them. Regardless, both charts seem to have a recipe for a bad day ... but I really don't want to move my dungeons closer to town ... so I guess I either have characters start at higher levels or come up with new encounter tables ... Another idea is this: with strongholds once the surrounding hexes have been cleared they stay clear. You could assume that close to town you expect no monsters and then at a certain distance from town then you start running into wilderness encounters. It kind of comes back to where do you define that civilization stops or where the wild begins. I run them as first level with first level hit points through the wilderness and they have learned to be careful - so there are a lot of ways you can run it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2016 20:46:41 GMT -5
Oh, it's totally about perception. But in a convention one-shot game I'm happy to make a small concession to keep nervous players from feeling like they can't do anything once they throw their one spell.
The difference it makes in people's minds is actually quite interesting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2016 20:53:11 GMT -5
Because the Dungeon is not in town ... Not everything that is not "town" is "wilderness". Civilized areas, cultivated farmlands near major cities, etc, though not town, are most certainly not wilderness. Even in the 14th century the area from London to Canterbury would not be considered "wilderness," whereas the road north of York certainly would be. The book says "wilderness" adventures, not "outdoor" adventures. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2016 23:11:25 GMT -5
Because the Dungeon is not in town ... Even in the 14th century the area from London to Canterbury would not be considered "wilderness," whereas the road north of York certainly would be. Great example ... That clicks in my brain better. The road to Canterbury might have Bandits, but not Cockatrices ... I think I get it. |
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Mar 30, 2016 4:43:44 GMT -5
Oh, it's totally about perception. But in a convention one-shot game I'm happy to make a small concession to keep nervous players from feeling like they can't do anything once they throw their one spell. The difference it makes in people's minds is actually quite interesting. Hmm. You must be getting new players in the sense of new to the hobby, as my experience has been the opposite with convention-goers: they are, of the majority, not only seasoned players but long-standing DMs. (Shrug...) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2016 8:58:27 GMT -5
I think it depends on their past experience. I have encountered a lot of people who have the perception that "a first level magic user who has used their spell is useless." I'm not sure where it comes from, but it's very common, at least in the part of the country I hang around in, and some gaming forums, though not this one.
At least part of this I've discovered in conversations is that there are some referees who seem to WANT a first level magic user to be useless other than the one spell, and will simply not let magic users succeed at much of anything.
Crom save me from the curse of players whose spirits have been crushed by bad referees.
|
|
|
|
Post by bestialwarlust on Mar 30, 2016 14:37:16 GMT -5
I think it depends on their past experience. I have encountered a lot of people who have the perception that "a first level magic user who has used their spell is useless." I'm not sure where it comes from, but it's very common, at least in the part of the country I hang around in, and some gaming forums, though not this one. At least part of this I've discovered in conversations is that there are some referees who seem to WANT a first level magic user to be useless other than the one spell, and will simply not let magic users succeed at much of anything. Crom save me from the curse of players whose spirits have been crushed by bad referees. I think this boils down to some players philosophy that if they aren't causing damage in combat they are useless. But this goes back to what I mentioned earlier in that most games focus on combat encounter to combat encounter instead of exploration and getting as much treasure with as little risk as possible. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2016 1:02:54 GMT -5
This is a subject I have a lot to say about, but I'll be gone a few days.
|
|
|
|
Post by captaincrumbcake on Mar 31, 2016 1:22:52 GMT -5
Makes sense, as you're just a-- Wanderer! (lol) See ya in a few.
|
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Apr 1, 2016 6:31:00 GMT -5
Combat should be the culmination of something, not the thing itself. Rethinking of XP awards then becomes a focal point in this substitution/or/addition stream. I've been doing that since the beginning after a fashion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Q Man on May 31, 2018 23:05:30 GMT -5
This is a truly great thread and I will read it again in a day or two. I always use the 4, 6, 8 HD for the different classes and feel that it is one of the ideas that really makes the game. For all the players running magic-users that complain about HPs and not being able to use a sword, I just tell them, if you want to play a fighter, then play a fighter. No one is making you play a magic-user.
|
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Jun 20, 2018 21:50:50 GMT -5
Thanks for bumping this up. I hadn't seen it before & it was great!
|
|
|
|
Post by Q Man on Jun 24, 2018 17:30:54 GMT -5
This is a subject I have a lot to say about, but I'll be gone a few days. @gronanofsimmerya, I just saw that you were going to talk about this. |
|
|
|
Post by Bartholmew Quarrels on Jun 28, 2018 8:53:14 GMT -5
I just use 1d6 for everything with any adjustments that apply. I allow one re-roll per level, but you have to keep the re-roll even if it is worse.
|
|
