Part four of five - 20 traps themed around Saving vs the Breath of Dragons!
Delve on, readers!
Public domain art respectfully stolen from OldBookIllustrations.com and ReusableArt.com. Attributions in alt text.
Part four of five - 20 traps themed around Saving vs the Breath of Dragons!
Delve on, readers!
Public domain art respectfully stolen from OldBookIllustrations.com and ReusableArt.com. Attributions in alt text.
Scale: 10 ft. Click here for a PDF version of this adventure! |
The ceilings are tall throughout this level; 12 feet in the hallways, 16 feet in the rooms if not otherwise specified, or around 50% taller than other dungeon levels if this is included as a wing to a larger structure. Doors and gates are likewise oversize.
Mixed among the bones and rocks are two purses, one with 20 gp and the other with 34 gp, and a bracelet worth 1,200 gp. Under the web in the center of the room on the floor, there is a chalcedony inlay in the shape of a triangle pointing west. It is mundane.
In the center of the room on the floor, there is a chalcedony inlay in the shape of a diamond. On close inspection, it flickers slightly on the corner that points eastward. Four chains from the ceiling - roughly six feet from each corner of the room towards the center, roughly six feet down from the ceiling. Any spell cast by a Magic User in this room has a 60% chance of being retained by the spell caster: that is, it does not escape their memory and can be used again elsewhere in the adventure.
In the center of the room on the floor, there is a chalcedony inlay in the shape of a triangle. It appears to be cracked, having had something heavy dropped upon it.
The door to this room is sealed (counts as stuck). Wrapping the room, 5 feet from the walls to the south, east, and west, but 10 feet from the entrance door to the north, is a depression, roughly eight inches deep: the walls of the depression being iron mesh. Along the south wall of the depression is a platform - 4 inches tall by eight feet wide by four feet deep - on which is an oversize-altar, engraved with a toothless smile.
On the altar are five electrum skulls, each with a horn between the eyes and each worth 20 gold pieces, as well as three gold bars worth 100 gold pieces each arranged in a north-pointing triangle and an ivory pyramid with platinum edges (100 gold piece value) in the center of the bars.
If a human-sized creature steps on the platform, it will slide down - releasing a toxic gas into the room. Any character in the depression will be exposed to the gas and must save vs poison or die.
Masses of clothing have been piled up along the northern half of this room, east and west sides. Some sacks full of legumes and fungus are piled in the south-west corner. On the north-east side, a Doppelganger (B33) is repining.
The doppelganger carries a satchel with a citrine (10gp), two emeralds (50 gp each), an expertly cut amethyst (100 gp), two black sapphires (500 gp each), and a single diamond (1,000 gp).
If the party enters the space, they feel a warm buzzing sensation.
If the party remains in the room for 1d4 rounds or greater, lawful characters will begin to glow a light blue color; chaotic characters will start to glow a slight orange. Characters of neutral alignment must Save vs Spells or have their alignment shifted to either Law or Chaos, determined randomly, after which point they, too, will glow accordingly.
The glow lasts for 1d4 turns and is the equivalent luminosity of a candle.
The door to this room is hidden. A sign is given that the mortar in the wall is more reflective to an observant party when a light is held near it. If open flame is pressed to the wall, the grout crumbles and the door can be pushed open.
Inside appears to be a treasure horde - long since looted. Several empty chests; several empty, smashed crates; but remaining are 5,000 silver, strewn about the floor; 600 gold pieces, in a lockbox under one of the crates, and a pouch with oval rubies in it worth 150 gold pieces each; on the floor near an Ochre Jelly (B40) which is dissolving a set of splintered boards.
On the east and west walls are tapestries depicting flame-beings across rocky surfaces. The room is warm and the floor is dark tile - the grout of which is hot to the touch, if the party checks. On the north side of the room, 20 feet from the door, there is a step up - along the wall hang four electrum chains worth 200 gold pieces each. Suspended between the four chains are three arming swords with silvered edges; as Sword, but silvered, and of value 100 gold pieces each.
The central strip of the room - 10 feet north to south by 30 feet (the breadth of the room) east to west - is a pressure trap. If a man-sized creature walks across, there is a chance the floor, in 10 foot section, will fall through: dropping anyone in the section - forcing them to save or fall 30 feet down into a magma flow.
A procession of 6 Trolls (X41) is moving west in this room. They are wearing primitive robes, tied with straps of what appears to be braided animal sinew. The one in the lead carries a somewhat rotted boar's head.
On the north wall is a sarcophagus - stone - buried beneath a wash of rotting vegetation. Atop is a statue of a troll-like figure, but it's face is oddly angular and elongated and with ears that seem to curve downward. The sarcophagus is actually empty, but it would require moving the giant statue to discover the fact.
The magic is not bound to the plate and does not work outside the room.
The room is ringed by a curtain of slow-flowing green liquid, emitting from holes in the ceiling before consolidating and dripping down into a trench - 6 inches wide - on the floor. In the center of the room is a pedestal on which an amulet rests. The amulet - if worn - causes a character's skin to become rubbery and alien (imposing a -1 to reaction rolls), but - if worn for one full day - will bestow limited regeneration on its wearer:
Encircling the pedestal are five sconces braziers - but in lieu of burning fuel, they have been filled with gold: 7,000 pieces total.
This space is lined with skins, furs, and foliage apparently pilfered from above. Eight Trolls (X41) repine in the space - 1d3 of them will be asleep; the others will be joking in the Chaotic tongue or casting bones.
The smell is impressive.
Public domain art lovingly pilfered from OldBookIllustrations.com and adapted for thematic use. Attributions in alt text.
|
Chainmail (With Shield) |
Swords of Jordoba, the name of the campaign and YouTube playlist it's hosted on as well as a line of products produced by the referee, "Uncle" Matt Finch, and made available online in various media and media outlets, is a traditional campaign run using the Swords & Wizardry retro-clone of OD&D (although it is referred to internally as OD&D) played and aired through 2018.
There exists a Twitch channel - Uncle Matt's D&D - but it appears not to be in use. Likewise, there are other playlists on Uncle Matt's YouTube. The scope of this review is exclusively the 0E Swords of Jordoba campaign provided in the info table above.
The first thing that stands out tremendously regarding this actual play is its use of physical miniatures, despite being played on live stream. The referee has an extensive collection of old-style minis in addition to a set of physical terrain - such that a small camera can follow the party around, showing the dungeon as they see it - in miniature. This lends itself to some very interesting challenges that the referee handles spectacularly.
Note, some of the YouTube playlists include instructions on obtaining, 3D-printing, and painting terrain as used on the actual-play. If you, the watcher, like what you see on Uncle Matt's table, I would encourage you to check them out! Among these unique challenges is combat proximity - there are no "squares" so the position of combatants is all relative: a player indicates that they wish to charge or otherwise engage an enemy, the referee informs them of challenges that may prevent it, or informs them of its success, and positions the miniature accordingly.
Additionally, players interacting with the environment - climbing on top of things to get better views, ducking behind or into alcoves to avoid detection: all of it is theater of mind, where the mind is assisted by the perspective of the models on camera: a virtual tabletop on a physical table. Watching the game pace - exploration, combat, parlay - in miniature while simultaneously observing the unique and interesting ways that the ref tackles things like lighting conditions while keeping the viewer informed as to what's going on at the table is a truly special experience: and, more importantly, one that novice or prospective game masters can benefit highly from: gleaning from Uncle Matt's experience.
In a similar vein, a novice or prospective OSR player can benefit from the experience of the majority of the player pool. Despite being exposed to physical layouts visually, the players draw maps on paper: then, in future episodes, refer back to their maps so as to guide their descent into the campaign's "megadungeon" - that is, a lower section of the city of Jordoba which has been sealed off and is home to monsters and treasure. Additionally, the players interact with the world leveraging an element of player skill coupled with the mechanical rules: that is, there isn't simply an, "I check for traps" so much as an, "I run my hand along the frame looking for a tripwire" - or, upon the discovery of a trap, efforts are made to disarm it using narration: not simply a percentile roll. A percentile roll is applied on occasion - but a note, the Thief class did not exist in OD&D, being introduced later in the Greyhawk supplement. This element of player versus dungeon is key to understanding the enjoyment of an old-school dungeon crawl. Player skills (knowing where to look, what to expect, and recognizing patterns) are more important than character skills (that is, numbers on paper).
Like most live-streamed events (recorded and retained thereafter), technical difficulties can get in the way of the presentation. This is a recurring theme early on and manifests itself in a couple ways: one being the freezing of cameras, one being the dropping of player connections, one being the playlist, itself, is out of order (though - as evidenced by experiences with prior reviews, that last one might simply be that I don't know how to operate the YouTube app on my phone). To its credit, the audio of the stream is level, even, and consistently not a problem. If you are listening to the stream as you might a podcast while working on something else, you wouldn't know they were having technical difficulties excepting when the players mention them as having been commented on by stream viewers.
The banter level of your average D&D table is fairly strong - one of the advice points I give aspiring referees is "Don't include intentionally humorous elements" (or, at least, don't include them very often), as the table will naturally be a ring of jokers doing everything in their power to turn their motley band into Monty Python's King Arthur. The Jordoba table is no exception - the players joking and enjoying themselves on air - and for the most part, it doesn't detract from the experience: however, it is in such abundance that on occasion, the viewer is impelled to skip forward on the track to see if actual progress has been made: on one occasion, a full 50 minutes pass in real time before the game actually begins. While weeding through episodes isn't a common pastime, it will on occasion arise for a listener whose purpose in listening is to learn the rules.
Lastly, I don't recall hearing, while listening through the episodes, the party utilize wilderness adventure procedures. It's possible that I missed it - I have not watched and taken notes on every video on the channel - and it's also possible that it simply didn't come up, as the campaign is primarily an urban-crawl and the player characters do not advance high enough to afford a stronghold or warband to perform a wilderness excursion: but knowing that S&W has wilderness procedures, I would like to see Uncle Matt run them: as, based on his expertise in dungeon crawling, it seems impossible to imagine his mastery of the wilderness crawl would not likewise be educational for new players and referees. To the channel's credit (and this probably belongs in the "things I like" section, but whatever), I do recall at least one video in which the mass-battles system from S&W is used - including a clash between woolly mammoths: so the breadth of the AP is not limited to just dungeons.
The game is repeatedly in the stream referred to as "OD&D" when - and usually, when Uncle Matt says "OD&D" he immediately clarifies this - they are technically using Swords & Wizardry, as indicated in the heading. This isn't a bad thing - but be aware, if you are reading the LBBs and they start talking about something that doesn't appear to be present in your booklet, that's why. S&W is a good representation of OD&D, but it is much more expansive.
More seriously, there are some minor house rules designed to improve character durability. Specifically, the referee back-ports some of the rules from newer editions that he considers to be superior to the way OD&D (and conversely S&W) handles them. The one that comes to mind is "Death and Dying" - wherein he allows the characters to drop below 0 hit points and make a "death save" to avoid dying: where, in RAW, a character dies at 0 (or -1, per S&W). There is nothing intrinsically wrong with keeping players alive in combat, as save-vs-poison or save-vs-death occurs in the campaign and player characters do die and get replaced (on one occasion, several characters belonging to the same character in the same session), but it's something to note, as it may not translate over into a game you join.
As one versed in newer editions might expect, they use the alternative combat system in the traditional way it's interpreted, contrary to the example of play from The Strategic Review that I ranted about last week. Lends some credence, I think.
The referee of this actual-play literally wrote the book (and the guide on what to expect!) on OSR gaming. How on Earth are you rating this Chainmail with Shield?
Dungeon crawling procedure is strong with this channel. Watching the referee ref and watching the players play is an exquisite resource for new players and aspiring OSR referees. That is without question. If I were to express any one disappointment with this channel, it would be that it hasn't updated in a year or so, as of this writing - and I would like to see more of it. Truly, the only thing keeping me from fanboy-ing Uncle Matt into the stratosphere are the interruptions to exposition resultant from technical issues and lengthy banter segments.
To conclude, this channel is truly refreshing - I have enjoyed the sub-set of its playlists that I have consumed - and I recommend it to anyone looking to watch and learn OSR. Who knows - maybe the shield is a magic one. Will have to fight a combat and see.
Thank you for reading - and delve on!
A copy of TSR's Strategic Review of Summer, 1975, was recently brought to my attention partly in conversation but also partly in response to my position on using Chainmail in OD&D. In this issue, a play example of OD&D using the ACS (which it specifies is the recommended approach) is provided. This example of play is printed as follows:
Strategic Review, Vol 1, Issue 2; p. 3 |
The author of the actual piece being unknown to me (something I'm sure I could find out, but am not keen to spend energy on) and the editors, both, of the review having passed into eternal rest, the constructive nature of this criticism may be somewhat moot. So on a less constructive note, though the combat example is provided does elucidate the method of combat better than the original Men & Magic booklet, it introduces as many ambiguities as it edifies.
First, not touching the dexterity and initiative comment.
It is implied in - but not stated directly - Men & Magic that a Dexterity modifier applies to the initiative roll.
This being an errata, this inclusion is fair and a clarification.
Second, what happened to the grapple?
The orcs have two successes when they attempt to subdue the hero; the example specifies then that the hero must roll back - struggling on a tie or throwing them aside if he succeeds. The orcs have two successes - and then the hero... strikes two of them with his weapon. Did he succeed in throwing them off off-screen?
Must be - when determining the target of his attacks, eight of the ten orcs are said to be eligible to be hit. Presumably, as it mentions, two orcs are stunned: as it says they are stunned "for 7 turns [rounds, to use B/X terminology] between them" - but it doesn't specify where the 15 and where the 8 came from to determine that 7! Does the hero roll four dice, per his "attack ratio" and compare those successes to theirs? Does the hero roll four dice (and of what size? Six-sided, a la Chainmail; or 20-sided, a la the ACS?) and pool the result, comparing it to the damage roll the orcs then rolled (again off camera) for what would in later publications be called "subdual"? The example does not say!
Third, shields and attacking from behind?
At no point in the LBBs is it indicated that shields are not applicable if attacked from behind. Likewise, nowhere in the LBBs is it indicated that an attacker who is attacking from behind (future editions would inherit "flanking" from this precedent, presumably) grants a bonus. Chainmail does have rules for flanking actions, which affect how well Mass Combat units fare defensively - and in Man to Man, it references attacking from behind, which primarily affects initiative. This represents - in my opinion - the introduction of a new rule: not the explanation of an existing system.
That all said, I do believe this combat exposition is a net positive - I will hate on it no longer. If the rules or procedures that I reference do exist, or are clear, in the original texts, please correct me. But from my perspective - the perspective of a third party consumer, as would have been people coming into the game afresh in 1974 - the clarifications provided in this combat example are equally as exemplary of the necessity of a follow-up edition with wider page margins to accommodate the missing rules that were here "clarified."
Thus, this combat example provides a system - an errata - for an element that had been omitted: sticking to a simple, quick solution that can be applied to games using subsequent editions, clones, or competing products.
Secondly, and truthfully the first element of this example that struck me: the referee running the example rolled multiple attacks for the hero - a number of attacks proportional to their Fighting Capability by level. Suddenly, the +1 and -1 make sense: as though they were designed for the ACS: where +1 or -1 on 1d20 has significantly different impact than it would on Chainmail's d6-based systems: dice pooled Mass Combat especially. More importantly, though, this - like the use of Chainmail's mass combat - massively increases the effectiveness of the Fighting Man in combat. Where at first level, the Fighting Man is rolling once to hit with a +1 bonus, by 10th level, the Fighting Man is rolling eight attacks per turn, all at +1 to hit. The Cleric is similarly active, essentially lagging merely a -1 behind: at first level, a Cleric rolls to hit with no bonus where at 10th level, the Cleric rolls to hit a similar eight attacks per turn at -1 penalty to hit. Magic Users get the short end of the stick - both fighting less effectively, RAW, and in rule clarity - they fight as an unmodified man, one d20 attack, at first level (as Cleric); then by 7th level they fight as Hero with modification, so four attacks; but then at level 10, they begin to fight as "Wizard," which in the Chainmail Fantasy Supplement fights as "Two Armored Men"... fewer attacks than they would have been entitled to at level 9 - but surely they make up for this with spells, themselves not actually being designed as a combat class.In OD&D - if this example is to be believed - the intention of the Fighting Man was to maintain the incredible melee effectiveness of a Chainmail Hero or Superhero character: something that would not have been done away with until AD&D, where fighters were given a second attack only at higher levels.
So, it would seem everyone was playing D&D wrong - including me and everyone I'd seen in the present day playing the elder edition! This example brings into focus the motive for AD&D: that is, to bring the game together (or attempt to) in a cohesive manner - by promoting continuity of rules, cross-pollination of players to referees (and from home settings into competitive or public forums), and thus growth of the hobby as a whole, becomes operable.
Great times!
In OD&D, all attacks deal 1d6 damage. Variable weapon damage would be introduced a year later in the Greyhawk supplement. Knowing that, using the example provided in the review, a Fighting Man of a given level can expect to deal damage as follows under the ACS:
vs. Armor Class | ||||||||
Ftr. Lvl. | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
1 | 0.875 | 1.05 | 1.225 | 1.4 | 1.575 | 1.75 | 1.925 | 2.1 |
2 | 1.75 | 2.1 | 2.45 | 2.8 | 3.15 | 3.5 | 3.85 | 4.2 |
3 (3 Men) | 2.625 | 3.15 | 3.675 | 4.2 | 4.725 | 5.25 | 5.775 | 6.3 |
3 (Hero-1) | 2.1 | 2.8 | 3.5 | 4.2 | 4.9 | 5.6 | 6.3 | 7 |
4 | 4.2 | 4.9 | 5.6 | 6.3 | 7 | 7.7 | 8.4 | 9.1 |
5 (Hero+1) | 4.9 | 5.6 | 6.3 | 7 | 7.7 | 8.4 | 9.1 | 9.8 |
5 (5 Men) | 5.25 | 6.125 | 7 | 7.875 | 8.75 | 9.625 | 10.5 | 11.375 |
6 (Hero+1) | 4.9 | 5.6 | 6.3 | 7 | 7.7 | 8.4 | 9.1 | 9.8 |
6 (6 Men) | 6.3 | 7.35 | 8.4 | 9.45 | 10.5 | 11.55 | 12.6 | 13.65 |
7 | 11.2 | 12.6 | 14 | 15.4 | 16.8 | 18.2 | 19.6 | 21 |
8 | 12.6 | 14 | 15.4 | 16.8 | 18.2 | 19.6 | 21 | 22.4 |
9 | 14 | 15.4 | 16.8 | 18.2 | 19.6 | 21 | 22.4 | 23.8 |
10 | 16.8 | 18.2 | 19.6 | 21 | 22.4 | 23.8 | 25.2 | 26.6 |
Again, the focus on Fighting Men not due to lack of love for Clerics or Magic Users, but for the sake of relative brevity; likewise, I exclude the percent chance to hit versus armor class because, having printed it in several other posts, I assume you, the reader, trust that I've done the To-Hit percentages.
The averages above reveal a couple interesting points:
It's better to fight as a group.
At three levels - 3, 5, and 6 - a fighting man has a choice to fight as a Hero with modifier or as a number of men. On all three occasions, the Fighting Man will do more damage per round, on average, if they choose to attack as the corresponding number of men - as the chance of hitting an adversary on 1d20 is modified so little by a +1 or -1 modifier compared to Chainmail's six-siders, having an additional die is much more likely to cause another hit to connect: thereby inflicting another 1-6 points of damage. On one occasion - level 6, you actually do less damage on average than you would do at the previous level.
As such, I can think of no reason to be a Hero With Modifier.
The required roll to hit, by level, matters.
At level 10, the Fighting Capability of the Fighting Man does not change - but the average damage per round does. Why is that? Because level 10 is a tier point: at level 10, the required To Hit rolls for the Fighting Man go down. Additionally, the progression of average damage is nominally smooth, with the exception of a noticeable jump in damage at level 7. Arguably, fighting against mid-range AC, there is likewise a jump at level 4. Is this intentional? Is this thematic? Potentially - potentially not: but it is a peculiarity of the system, one that results from those required roll To Hit tiers: which appear at exactly the point where damage output increases. Level 7, in particular, sees a 3-point jump - compared to level 4, which - unlike level 4 and level 10: which only see improvements of 2 points on the chart.
Do I see an automatic hit at higher levels?
Although not reflected in the table above - as I stop at level 10 - but there are entries for level 16 and above on the Men Attacking table. At level 13 - one tier up from the 10th level where I stop, the required roll to hit AC 9, No Armor or Shield, is 1; at level 16, this increases - a level 16 or better Fighting Man hits AC 6, Leather & Shield, on a 1 or better. Is it possible to roll less than a 1? Yes - for example, using a cursed weapon - but interestingly, at no point in the Men & Magic book does it say rolling a natural 1 on your d20 attack roll automatically fails. Does this imply otherwise?
How does this compare to damage dealt in, say, B/X?
As established in the previous post, damage dealt in B/X is a bit more nuanced - as though variable damage is an optional rule, in modern vintage, someone running without the optional damage rule is an aberration - however, for comparison, provided is the damage a B/X Fighter can expect to output per turn using a 1d8 weapon:
vs. Armor Class | ||||||||
Ftr. Lvl. | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
1-3 | 0.9 | 1.125 | 1.35 | 1.575 | 1.8 | 2.025 | 2.25 | 2.475 |
4-6 | 1.35 | 1.575 | 1.8 | 2.025 | 2.25 | 2.475 | 2.7 | 2.925 |
7-9 | 2.025 | 2.25 | 2.475 | 2.7 | 2.925 | 3.15 | 3.375 | 3.6 |
10 | 2.475 | 2.7 | 2.925 | 3.15 | 3.375 | 3.6 | 3.825 | 4.05 |
While we're on the subject of doing other things - grappling, disarming, interfering... - the round is assumed, per the game's authors, not to represent a single blow by blow, but instead a flurry of activity: feints, parries, thrusts, and maneuvering - but elaborates little on how to accomplish these things: until this combat example, that is. Want to disarm? To subdue? Why not roll and compare values - if you have more hits than they do, or if your d6s are greater than theirs, succeed? Simple and elegant - the epitome of an on-the-spot ruling.
How does the ACS, with this development, fair against Chainmail?
Again, in the spirit of relative brevity and giving the edge to the competition over the ACS, a Fighting Man can - assuming they are armed and armored "as Armored" - expect to damage to first level foes, based on their infantry categorization, as follows:
OD&D and Chainmail: As Armored | |||
Ftr. Lvl. | Armored | Heavy | Light |
1 | 1.17 | 2.33 | 3.50 |
2 | 1.75 | 3.50 | 5.25 |
3 | 1.75 | 3.50 | 5.25 |
4 | 2.33 | 4.67 | 7.00 |
5 | 2.92 | 5.83 | 8.75 |
6 | 3.50 | 7.00 | 10.50 |
7 | 4.08 | 8.17 | 12.25 |
8 | 4.67 | 9.33 | 14.00 |
9 | 5.25 | 10.50 | 15.75 |
10 | 5.25 | 10.50 | 15.75 |
While Chainmail seems to similarly allow a Fighting Man to deal a large amount of damage compared to B/X, compared to the ACS as clarified by the example from The Strategic Review, Chainmail seems curve-bound. Looking at the damage output to lightly armored opponents, Chainmail starts out dealing more damage than the ACS, but increases more slowly - such that the two meet around level 3 or 4 and the ACS deals more damage going forward: significantly more at much higher levels. The trend is the same for heavily armored opponents - Chainmail starts out more lethal, but the ACS overtakes it by level 3 or 4 and then proceeds to outpace it ever onwards.
Curiously, the difference in damage dealt at a given level is flat rather than proportional: that is, for example, at 10th level, the difference between average Chainmail damage and average ACS damage is about 10 points - regardless of armor level. In B/X, the difference increases more exponentially rather than geometrically, as observed with Chainmail. Makes sense - however: as, using the clarifications provided, both Chainmail and the ACS use dice pools (or, at least, multiple attacks) - compared to B/X, where the Fighter is limited to a single attack per turn: and no matter how accurate that attack is, there is only so much damage a single d8 hit can do.
I'm going to run the game the way it best works at my table. If the verbal irony had not translated in text, despite this being an official publication by TSR, I don't believe this is how the game was played, nor really how it was intended to be played: if indeed an intention was there at the time OD&D hit the shelves. For me - however - as this article still is a eureka moment, as was reviewing Chainmail: and that moment is proof positive that the purpose of AD&D is to run tournaments; the purpose of OD&D is to run games.
Chainmail addressed several of the elements of D&D that I don't really jive with. I don't get "hit points" - how you're 100% effective until you die - even abstracted as "luck" and "fatigue" mixed with meat, it doesn't make sense why they take so long to come back, apart from stretching campaigns out to prevent the case of the 20th Level 20-Something.
I don't get how a level 1 fighter and a level 10 fighter wearing the same armor are equally likely to take a hit in a fight - it doesn't make sense, from the perspective of learning the skill of swordsmanship, that you'd never improve your ability to parry, but become an absolute expert at finding knicks and holes in the sturdiest metal armors. Likewise, it discourages Sword and Sandals play - or Conan-In-A-Loincloth games - which make up a great deal of the Appendix N material and thus deserve to be represented. Chainmail does that for me - and sure, I'm likely to houserule it - but who doesn't? That's the point of keeping the rulebook booklet sized. The motive of the article might have been to clarify, but the motive of the authors is clear: they cared more at the time that you, as a gamer, played a game that worked for your table and that made a memory worth making. Regarding the example provided and the numerical analysis, I don't think they went into it as deeply as I might have here when they originally playtested and published: I think they threw stuff against the wall, watched what stuck, and then packaged it together as a box set - knowing all the while that what stuck to one wall wouldn't stick to others, but at the same time seeing the value in having a common ground - a central rule and lingua franca - to use in congregation.
The final question in my brain, why did the TSR team later settle on not throwing around handfuls of d20s? To be truthful, in part, it would not surprise me to hear that - all non six-sided dice sold actually being educational tools for the illustration of Regular Polygons - they simply didn't have that many of them.
And who wants to slow down play by rolling the same one over and over? If someone else knows the actual answer - again - please post it: I'd be eager to learn!
Delve on, readers!
Quotations and rules from the following copyrighted works are included herein for illustrative and educational purposes and remain the intellectual property of the copyright holder - as of October 2020, Wizards of the Coast LLC. Neither the author nor Clerics Wear Ringmail lay claim to the verbiage nor mechanics quoted but instead encourage the reader to engage with and enjoy the product referenced for their intended purpose.
Gygax, E. Gary, & Blume, Brian (Eds.). (1975). Questions Most Frequently Asked About Dungeons & Dragons Rules. The Strategic Review, 1(2), 3–4.
Public domain artwork retrieved from OldBookIllustrations.com or the National Gallery of Art and adapted for thematic use. Attributions in alt text.
Part Three of the Traps series: 20 themed traps around Save vs Wands.
Saving vs Wands is arguably the most challenging of the five original saves in terms of coming up with non-standard challenges. Wands are very specific items with very specific effects - and though the application of different saves to different, non-specified hazards is a tried and true practice (e.g. - does this trap produce an area effect, like a rain of acid or a belch of flame? Dragon's breath! Does this trap mutate the victim into an eldritch being? Spells!) what constitutes a "wand?" I've seen people who use wands to save against stream or otherwise indirect, but targeted attacks - shaft of light attacks, bursts of projectiles, streams of sand (see that one below) - but in some other products, those style attacks roll against AC to hit, same as a targeted attack would. I've seen other people use wands exclusively to refer to traps that emulate wand effects (e.g. - a trap emulating a Wand of Cancellation would use the Wands save) - but in so doing, what happens when the trap emulates a Wand of Paralyzation?
In any case, I've tried below to walk the line - but the point being to inspire you, the reader, to main or kill your player characters with inspired and novel traps, it was more important to me to provide something interesting and challenging. As always, pilfer, modify, or whatnot as needed to improve the quality of your game - and feedback is always welcome!
Happy trapping!
Public domain art retrieved from ReusableArt.com, the National Gallery of Art, or OldBookIllustrations.com and adapted for thematic use. Attribution in alt text.
Licensed photo, Water Fountain 6178 by Wikimedia Commons user Dori, retrieved from Wikimedia Commons on 11/18/2020 and adapted for thematic use. Water Fountain 6178 is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License 1.2 and under U.S. Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 - in accordance with said license, the adapted version herein - identified and attributed via alt text, same as public domain pieces - was created and utilized without the knowledge, consent, nor endorsement of the original author and is itself, specifically, released under the same licenses.
N-Spiration: The Night Land "[I]t is yet one of the most potent pieces of macabre imagination ever written. The picture of a n...