Category: Articles

  • Weapons of Change

    Weapons of Change

    June 2013

    This article was originally published in & Magazine Issue 5 in May 2013. Please note that the fiction section is the author’s original version. The version published in the magazine was shortened for editorials reasons.


    Magic weapons are not always what they seem to be

    Wisl of Coomb drummed his fingers on the table, visibly irritated and obviously expecting faster results. Gislhere sighed quietly. Illiterate nobles showed impatience while others searched for information they were intrinsically incapable of finding. But men like Wisl paid the fees that supported research and purchased yet more books and scrolls.

    The sixth volume checked had the reference the scholar sought. He looked up brightly at his temporary employer.

    “You found the information I need?”

    “Yes, my lord. Your battle axe is indeed an important weapon with a long history prior to your grandfather winning it in battle.”

    * * *

    Kneeling with head bowed, the soldier waited while the senior priest completed the first part of the ceremony. The incense burned his sinuses and eyes, but the soldier’s patience and acceptance of suffering, lessons learned through hard experience, kept him in place.

    The priest completed his chanting in the old tongue, “Rise, Irminric, soldier of Donblas!” The soldier surged smoothly to his feet, no hint of cramping caused by thirty minutes of kneeling visible on his face or in his actions.

    Lifting the axe from the pillow the priest presented it to Irminric. Head bowed the soldier accepted the weapon, its weight nothing in his strong hands. “Do you swear to use this weapon for justice, to use it bravely and with good intent in your duties as a protector of the People?”

    “I do swear!” The young man’s face flushed with a rush of emotion kept barely in check.

    * * *

    In an anteroom Irminric questioned the priest, “Oswald, you said that Donblas blessed this axe. What does that mean?”

    “This axe is imbued with powerful magics, different from what wizards place on weapons, but powerful none the less. Unlike wizard-built weapons this one does not bear a single level of power. Instead its power varies with the power of its wielder.”

    “When a wizard enspells a weapon he casts one or more spells upon the weapon and then binds the spells permanently to it. Priests do not wield such magics.” Oswald mentally debated a few moments on how to proceed. “We use the magics granted us by our god to perform a similar, but very different, thing.”

    Irminric frowned but before he could utter a word the priest drew a breath and continued, “This weapon began when I commissioned a weapon of the highest quality. It is constructed of a star iron and mithril alloy – rust-proof, harder yet more flexible, and more accepting of spells than mere steel. We senior priests consecrated it and cast spells upon it, setting its direction and preparing it for blessing by Donblas himself!”

    Noting that Irminric listened intently as if spellbound, he continued, “Then we prayed to Donblas to bless the weapon. He did so, and the result is the weapon you now hold in your hands.”

    “This axe has an edge no non-magical weapon could have, and it will maintain that edge against most targets. It will strike creatures whose skin or hide are proof against mundane weapons, and will even pierce the skin of demons and other unnatural creatures! It’s powers are greatest against undead monsters. Beyond that I don’t know for sure.”

    The priest spoke in a more heated tone, “Donblas’ blessing is a powerful thing, more powerful than all but a few other gods that might approach his strength. Until you use it we don’t know all it may do.” In a softer tone the priest continued, “But just as important is the wielder. The more skilled the pious one who wields it, the more powerful the blade becomes.”

    * * *

    Irminric’s knees buckled when the heavy sword slammed into his shield, but he kept on his feet. The necromancer’s human guards were without exception big, strong, and skilled in sword play. This one battering his shield was enough to nearly unman him.

    Shunting the guard’s follow-up strike aside with the shield Irminric struck in return, his magically sharp axe splitting the guard’s shield down the middle and shattering his arm. Controlling but not slowing the motion of the axe Irminric spun it in a figure eight and decapitated his opponent.

    He staggered to help his men who were losing to the necromancer’s other guards. Two of Donblas’ soldiers were dead or dying, two were badly wounded, and the remaining two bleeding from minor wounds. Irminric hit the first guard from behind, dropping him instantly and carrying the motion into the second. The remaining two guards lost focus, turning to deal with a greater danger. The lapse in focus proved fatal as the soldiers used the distraction to bloodily end the fight.

    Irminric checked his downed men – both were dead. Pulling strips of clean cloth from a pouch on his belt, he quickly bound the wounds of the living. “Shock and loss of blood often kill when the wounds won’t.

    “We’re outnumbered and badly damaged. Pick up Regenhere and Samlis – we’ll not leave their bodies for the necromancer to desecrate!” The least wounded men shouldered the dead and moved to follow their leader.

    Leading the way out of the building into the courtyard, Irminric stopped cold. In the moonlight stood the necromancer’s reinforcements – a dozen zombies – mindless animated bodies capable of using weapons and following simple directions such as “kill” – led by the stinking form of a wight.

    Zombies reacted relatively slowly so in the open the fast moving, well trained soldiers could defeat greater numbers. But the wight changed the odds badly – it’s touch burned with cold and sucked life from its victims. Worse than death was the fate of one drained of life by the abomination!

    Irminric lunged forward and hacked downward on the closest zombie, striking the joint between neck and shoulder. The super-sharp blade sliced through the leather armor cladding the undead thing, hacking through undead flesh and bone. Light flashed from the axe blade, bright to the human soldiers, blinding to the undead. The stink of the rotting bodies mixed with the stench of burned flesh – the flash burned the undead and staggered them.

    “AT THEM!” Irminric stepped past the nearest two zombies and hacked at the third. Its sword arm now gone at the elbow the zombie tried to hug the young soldier. Gagging at the stench Irminric stepped under the lunge and swung back to sever a leg at mid-thigh.

    Moving on he battered the next in line with his shield, ducked a slash, spun, and decapitated the fifth that moved in on his left. Another burst of light illuminated the area and burned the zombies. Eight of the dozen were down and the remaining four reeled from the damage. The three surviving soldiers didn’t hesitate to attack while chance favored them.

    The second flash left the wight staggering in circles, stunned to insensibility. The magical axe’s third flash scorched the remaining zombies.

    * * *

    “Your axe was handed down from father to son for twelve generations in the Willic family, until Irminric V lost it, along with his life, in battle against your grandfather.”

    “I know that, I know that!” howled the nobleman, hammering on the small table with both hands. “Why did it work so well for my father but not for me!”.

    “Yes, I’m getting to that. This axe is very potent against the living dead, capable of slashing and hacking through their flesh, such as it is, with more facility than against the living. On a killing stroke it emits a burst of pure light that burns all nearby undead while any undead possessing a mind may be stunned.”

    “That is the powers of this weapon. Why it worked better for your father than for you? This weapon is blessed by Donblas. Devout followers of Donblas, as well as followers of Osiris and Heironeous his allies, are granted use of its powers. If you don’t follow Donblas, Osiris, or Heironeous the powers against undead won’t work.”

    The Baron of Coomb was uncharacteristically silent as he digested that information.

    Eyeing the nobleman, Gislhere continued, “Just as importantly weapons of this nature gain a portion of their power from the wielder. The more powerful and skillful the wielder, the greater the powers of the axe. Your father was both a great axeman and a faithful follower of Osiris. My understanding is that you are neither, so until both conditions change you will never master this weapon.”


    The Problem

    Early in my DM career I found it easy to use the treasure tables in the Monster Manual and Dungeon Masters Guide, blithely putting in whatever the dice rolls indicated. As the members of my first campaign gained levels they amassed a mess of +1 and +2 weapons and armor. Around 7th level when they were seeking henchmen this proved useful as they had spare weapons to sweeten the employment agreements. But a few levels later the backlog of +1 and +2 items returned and some characters had enough magical weapons and armor to literally equip a small army.

    Learning from experience I switched tactics, putting in less magic items. Those I chose were targeted specifically for the party, not necessarily according to dice roll. This solved that problem but one remained: a character acquires a +1 weapon. What happens to it in a few more levels when that character acquires a +2 weapon? The typical answer is that it gets written down on a “stored items” sheet and forgotten. Targeting magic items reduces the problem of excess weapons but doesn’t eliminate it.

    One Solution

    One solution is to design weapons that increase in power as the user gains levels. There’s no need to design a replacement weapon as the weapon effectively replaces itself over time.

    This idea addresses another problem common to virtually any role playing game: the game may eventually become just more of the same, over and over again. Here’s a typical situation: Fighter acquires magic weapon. Magic user casts Identify and says, “This is a +1 weapon”. Fighter uses it until he acquires a +2 weapon then shelves the +1. Later on history repeats itself when the fighter acquires a +3 weapon. No mystery, no wondering, just routine “stuff”. Lather, rinse, repeat.

    Instead make the +1 weapon a Weapon of Change. Fighter uses weapon previously identified as +1. Fighter gains a level or three and discovers the weapon is now +2! He also discovers (by accident) that a previously unknown power functions. Goes to another magic user who identifies it and says “+1 weapon”. Fighter gains more levels and discovers weapon now hits at +3 and displays even more powers! Another Identify again indicates “+1”. [Note: This is not the by-the-book usage of Identify.]

    Even a player with decades of playing experience wonders, “What the …?”

    The fighter finally takes the weapon to a temple of the deity whose symbols are etched on the weapon. A senior cleric researches it (for a fee!) and tells the fighter that the weapon was created by clerics of that deity centuries ago. To anyone other than a follower of that deity (or optionally that deity’s allies or the same alignment) it’s a +1 weapon, which is what Identify says it is. But to the select few it’s a Weapon of Change that increases in power and ability as its wielder does.

    So the player now has something new to look forward to with each level change — checking the weapon to see if any new powers activate. Identify doesn’t work — and sages, legend lore, commune, etc. may — or may not — reveal details, hints, or riddles at the DM’s discretion.

    Following are a few items, including the axe described in the story.


    Axe of Donblas

    The weapon in the story is a Battle Axe +1, usable by anyone. For followers of Donblas or his allies it becomes far more powerful. As the wielder’s level increases the “normal plus” of the weapon increases when used against all types of opponents. Against undead it becomes more potent as the Plus Against Undead column indicates (see table).

    Special Powers: On a killing stroke (hit that reduces an undead to 0 hit points or less) that is at least 5 points above the minimum necessary to hit (including all bonuses), the blade emits a flash of light. This light illuminates a radius from the wielder and is bright but not blinding to mortal creatures. All undead within the radius suffer burn damage and possible stunning.

    For example, a 1st level fighter uses this axe. For her the weapon is +3 vs. undead and she requires a 13 to hit a skeleton. Any adjusted to-hit roll of 18 or greater that inflicts enough damage to destroy the skeleton triggers the special power and inflicts 1d4 damage against all undead within 10′. Adjusted rolls of 13 to 17 will hit but not trigger the power.

    GP value 2,000-10,000; XP value 800-4,000

    Why variable XP and GP values? The axe’s power varies by the wielder’s level, so award XP according to that. At the DM’s discretion additional XP can be awarded as the PC discovers additional powers.

    Wielder’s Level Normal Plus Plus Against Undead Special Powers Against Undead
    1 +1 +3 Flash illuminates 10′ radius, and inflicts 1d4 points of damage to all undead within flash.
    5 +2 +4 Flash illuminates 10′ radius, and inflicts 1d4 points of damage to all undead within flash. Intelligent undead in range save vs. Spell at +3 or be stunned for 1d4 rounds.
    9 +3 +5 Flash illuminates 15′ radius, and inflicts 2d4 points of damage to all undead within flash. Intelligent undead in range save vs. Spell at +2 or be stunned for 1d4 rounds.
    13 +4 +6 Flash illuminates 15′ radius, and inflicts 2d4 points of damage to all undead within flash. Intelligent undead in range save vs. Spell at +1 or be stunned for 1d4 rounds.
    17 +5 +7 Flash illuminates 20′ radius, and inflicts 3d4 points of damage to all undead within flash. Intelligent undead in range save vs. Spell or be stunned for 1d4 rounds.

    Why Cleric Made Items?

    According to the Dungeon Masters Guide (DMG) (page 116) all magic items excepting a few usable only by clerics and those specific to certain races (like Hammer of the Dwarven Thrower) are made by magic users. So by-the-book clerics can make some magic items. If a DM chooses to allow clerics to make magic items that is simply an extension of an existing rule. Given the mysticism typically inherent in any religion, it makes sense that a cleric made item may not work out exactly as the maker plans, since the deity is supplying the power that makes it work. It’s even possible that, depending on the deity, the deity may not know (or remember or care) exactly what powers an item possesses.

    Can PC clerics make such items? That’s up to each DM — this article doesn’t contain rules for item creation, merely a new dimension that can be added to any campaign.

    Especially for players who have been playing for decades, this brings a new concept to the game. They have to work to find out what an item does. It’s something out of the ordinary and brings freshness to the table.

    More Ideas

    This same concept can be applied to other weapons, armor, even miscellaneous magic items. Consider a ring that performs detection spells (Detect Magic, Poison, Traps, etc). Increases in level could enable more castings per day and broaden the type of Detect spells available. The Detect spells could be invoked at a level equal to the wearer’s level.

    Powers can be automatic or they can require command words or special gestures (let the player figure out what gesture just caused a power to activate!). Finding information may require an extended adventure, or series of adventures. With a bit of ingenuity the DM can entertain the entire group for months or even years with a single item.

    Author’s note: While proofing this article I realized there was more to say on the subject. So while assembling quesadillas with my sons we dreamed up the following items.


    Moa’s Bracers of Defense

    These magical bracers appear to be typical Bracers of Defense AC7, providing armor class 7 protection to any who wear it. However, magic users who worship Aarth discover these bracers provide additional abilities to the faithful. At first level the bracers do, indeed, provide AC7 protection, which improves as the magic user increases in level.

    At higher levels the magic user will discover another bonus – the bracers provide a bonus on saving throws identical to that provided by a Ring of Protection. The following table summarizes the armor class and saving throws by level.

    Level AC Save Bonus
    1 7
    3 6 +1
    5 5 +1
    7 4 +2
    9 3 +2
    11 2 +3

    GP value 9,000-24,000; XP value 2,400-7,200


    Ring of Shadows

    Szürkeegér the Bold first wore this ring, which he stole from the clerics of Zagyg. They had prepared it for a high-ranking member of the faithful, but Zagyg was so pleased with Szürkeegér’s boldness that he obscured the knowledge of who stole the ring from his clergy.

    The Ring identifies as a Ring of Protection +1, and it does indeed provide that ability to all who wear it.

    Thief followers of Zagyg who tithe regularly discover a number of improvements in their thieving skills. They receive a bonus of 3% per level in their skills of Pick Pockets, Open Locks, Find/Remove Traps, Move Silently, Hide in Shadows, Hear Noise, and Climb Walls.

    At 7th level the faithful may discover that they can detect a non-magical trap merely by examining an item without touching it. If the roll is successful they will know for sure if a trap does or does not exist. Removing or disarming the trap requires yet another roll.

    At 10th level the faithful may discover the ability to climb walls as if a Spider Climb spell is in effect. This ability can be used 3 times per day and each usage has a duration of 3 rounds per level.

    Should the faithful fail to properly tithe the god, the former benefits will be reversed, with a 3% per level penalty on all thieving skills. Attempts to examine a trap will always be wrong, and the Spider Climb ability will terminate after 1d6+2 rounds.

    Non-thieves and thieves who do not tithe Zagyg regularly discover that the ring acts as cursed, with a 1% cumulative chance per day that the wearer will be overcome with the desire to pick someone’s pocket. Accursed thieves will gain a bonus of 30% in picking pockets, while non-thieves will discover they have basic thief ability while wearing the ring, a 30% chance of success. The wearer will not realize their growing obsession with thievery until they actually pick someone’s pocket. Until this time they may easily remove the ring, but after the first attempt a Remove Curse from a cleric of 7th level or higher is required to discard the ring. Once the curse is activated the victim will randomly pick someone’s pocket each day until the curse is removed or the hapless thief is hanged, at which time the ring can easily be removed.

    GP value 4,500-13,500; XP value 1,500-4,500


    Diadem of Thoth

    The Diadem of Thoth is a distinctive item, a mesh of the finest platinum set with a large golden beryl in the front with three smaller stones on either side. As a piece of jewelry it has fetched a price in excess of 25,000 gp.

    This item does not radiate magic. However, if a cleric of Thoth places the diadem upon their head, they will immediately realize it contains powerful magic.

    For 1st level clerics the Diadem acts a Ring of Protection +1, providing a bonus to armor class and to all saving throws.

    Any detection spell cast by a cleric of Thoth while wearing the diadem is cast as if the cleric were three levels higher. Furthermore, spell ranges are doubled and any applicable saving throws are at -3.

    At 3rd level the cleric may take Detect Invisibility as a 1st level spell, casting it as would a magic user. At 5th level the cleric may take Detect Illusion as a 2nd level spell. At 7th level the cleric may take as a 3rd level spell a form of Detect Traps which function precisely as a Wand of Trap Detection. Note that these are not additional spells – the cleric must use an existing spell slot for the spell. Also note that the diadem must be worn while praying/meditating for the spells and must be worn while casting. It may be removed in between.

    For non-clerical faithful followers of Thoth the diadem acts as a Ring of Protection +1, and for non-followers it is completely inert.

    GP value 4,500-13,500; XP value 1,500-4,500


    This page last updated: 05 June 2013

    Copyright 2013 Bryan Fazekas

  • Q&A With Tim Kask

    June 2013

    This article was originally published in & Magazine, Issue 4 in February 2013. Recorded by Bryan Fazekas.


    Tim Kask, one of the people who helped create OD&D and AD&D, posts frequently to a Q&A forum on Dragonsfoot. Tim is kind enough to answer a lot of questions and has graciously permitted & Magazine to reprint select portions from his forum.

    Tim Kask is one of the proprietors of Eldritch Enterprises (now defunct), a new company formed by some of the great minds that produced D&D.

     

    BF: Tim — got another one for the Wayback Machine. Do you recall the rationale for placing a cap on the levels for the druid, assassin, and monk? They stand out oddly (IMO) and I’ve been wondering about this.

    TK: To answer that question we must, indeed, utilize the Wayback Machine (with a nod to Rocky & Bullwinkle), and set it on Original Mid-Set. So grab your hot chocolate and settle back for a strange tale, a tale of times when RPG’s actually had end-game goals.

    End-game goals? What a novel idea, at least for what seems to be a majority of contemporary players. Just what were those novel ideas? Same as you and me in real life: make a stack of cash, buy or build the home/castle of our dreams on our own substantial property where nobody is likely to mess with us and retire to enjoy the fruits of our labors.

    Yes, Virginia, we really did play like that. All of us had PC’s that were “retired” or “semi-retired”; we did not use them except for special circumstances. Learning at Gary’s knee, so to speak, as I did, I had a whole stable of PC’s because he did, as well as the rest of the original players. It seems today that too many players get way too involved in just one PC; to say that some seem to obsess over their PC’s is fair, I think. When you had a stable of PC’s, as we did, you could view the PC’s as you might a pack of fine hunting dogs. Each dog in the pack had its strong and weak points, but you seldom develop a deep attachment with more than one or two of the pack. Certainly it hurts to lose any of them, but the pack endures.

    Part of the reason we had multiple PC’s had to do with injury, healing and timelines; if my currently-favorite Fighting Man was laid up recuperating (I hated those original healing rules and argued with Gary about them several times.) but word had just come at the tavern that a new menace was in the offing with a promise of loot, I “played” my next-best-for-the-situation character. We were gathered together to play, after all.

    Having tried to explain the prevailing mindset, the following answers may make a little more sense.

    The Druid class actually had a bit of historical research behind it so setting a level limit that corresponded to historical thought about druids (we really know very little outside of the Roman propaganda) seemed a logical thing to do. After all, years and years of study working their way through the druidic and bardic ranks meant that most high level druids would be fairly old men. Gary had done a prodigious amount of research and had planned on a druid of his own, well before Dennis sent his excellent take on it to us. The mists of time make it a big foggy, but I do not recall making much alteration to the druid to meet Gary’s OK to publish. (One of the very few cases of running anything past him first was anything that might become construed as canon, and that only in the beginning.)

    The assassin was, in my opinion, an experiment that went wrong. In those early days of negative publicity and much of the public misunderstanding exactly what we were doing, we were careful to downplay the fact that yes, you could do some pretty evil or wicked things in the game if you were of a mind to. We seldom published maleficent spells. The spells were what they were; how they were used and against whom and what was more important. We did state that a good number of spells could be reversed, with pretty nasty consequences. But honestly, we never saw the hired killer as much more than an exotic NPC to be hired to do “wet work”. (Gary never understood how Thieves could be tolerated on a daily campaign basis, or how “real thieves” would refrain from stealing from party members if the chance arose. He saw them as the true N/N alignment: “me first”.)

    Being a subset of thieves, assassins become Hollywood killing machines at high levels; all those adds and boni (“from behind” or “backstab”, etc.) meant that they had the capability to take out rather high-level PC’s and NPC’s willy-nilly. We saw that as too much of a campaign “un-balancer” and did not wish to inflict it on the already long-suffering DM’s. We actually made a lot of decisions in the early days from a perspective of not burdening the DM’s with more than they needed or could assimilate. Yes, we felt very paternalistic.

    TSR was more or less forced to come out with a monk class. We fended off everyone with a mimeo machine that thought we had screwed it up and that they could do it better. David Carradine’s Kung Fu resonated with a lot of gamers and particularly RPG’ers who all saw themselves as Caine, kicking butt across the Western US. Sadly, one of the principals (not Gary) was so in love with the whole fighting monk crapola that it was inevitable that we would do one. I have made no bones about the fact that I hate the class. As written, these guys cling to walls and ceilings like Peter Parker and kick butt like Bruce Lee taking on the local toughs and bullies. The D&D monk is a joke in a historical sense. Yes, there were monasteries full of warrior monks in several periods of Japanese history; they were spear-carriers like infantry, not squads of death- and gravity-defying hyper-efficient killers.

    So, having elucidated on our mind-set of retirement as the ultimate and totally honorable goal of the game, it comes to this admission: we could not see any good reason why players would not retire old PC’s and then foster other PC’s to greatness and retirement. This was pre-MM; there just was not that much stuff to kill and it should have gotten boring. We naively thought that most players enjoyed the struggle to survive and thrive as we did. We should have seen that greed would prevail; it always does.

    Hope that answers your question. It was a different gaming climate then. That was over 35 years ago, man. A lot of you were not even born then. You had to be there …

     

    BF: Why did magic users have 9 levels of spells while the other classes only have 7?

    TK: Over a period of time the conceptualization of clerical “spells” morphed into prayers, rites, and rituals. We reasoned that there was a relatively finite number of ways to pray or otherwise invoke divine favor.

    Magic, on the other hand, was infinitely mutable and malleable, limitless in what it might achieve. When those mega-spells came out in GH, we had a couple of different motives. First, we were ramping up the lethality of the potential foe. Second, we were introducing mega-magic in the form of scrolls that might be possibly used by lower levels, though sometimes with unfortunate or unforeseen results.

    As a DM I have always entertained and encouraged original spell research. I once had a player that had researched fire so thoroughly that he had six legitimate variations on the common fireball spell, for which he paid dearly in research costs and times.

    That is another argument in favor of multiple PC’s; you can burn months of game time researching while out adventuring as someone else.

     

    BF: Do you recall where the term “module” came from, in reference to packaged dungeons/ adventures?

    TK: “Scenario” was linked to boards, with a little reference to minis. “Modular” was a hot buzzword; modular this, modular that, modular design, spacecraft modules etc. As to which of us, Gary, Brian [Blume] or me, came up with it? Probably consensus.

  • Undead Unlimited!

    June 2013

    This article was originally published in & Magazine, Issue 2 in August 2012. Written by Bryan Fazekas.


    Most adults have seen at least one of the plethora of zombie movies that have spawned like blowflies on a corpse since Night of the Living Dead premiered in 1968. In most of the movies the undead multiply as the people who are wounded – or killed but not eaten – all rise as zombies. They multiply without bounds, threatening to overrun the world, and wiping out all uninfected humans. One version of The Apocalypse.

    Now consider undead in AD&D. Undead such as skeletons and zombies don’t multiply, they have to be created. Liches and mummies are also constructed, so they don’t multiply either. But ghouls, ghasts, and level draining undead reproduce by killing or draining mortals. The following excerpts are from the AD&D Monster Manual (MM):

    Ghoul, page 43: Any human killed by a ghoulish attack will become a ghoul unless blessed (or blessed and then resurrected).

    Spectre, page 89: Any human totally drained of life energy by a spectre becomes a half-strength spectre under the control of the spectre which drained him.

    Vampire, page 99: Any human or humanoid drained of all life energy by a vampire becomes an appropriately strengthened vampire under control of its slayer.

    Wight, page 100: Any human totally drained of life energy by a wight will become a half-strength wight under control of its slayer.

    What stops these undead from proliferating like the heavies in a George Romero movie, eventually obliterating the campaign world? Practically speaking, nothing. The average zero level human, or one HD dwarf or elf, has little chance in dealing with the least of these monsters and absolutely no chance of survival against the most powerful.

    If a vampire kills one person per week, that adds up to 52 people at the end of a year, 5,200 at the end of a century. If each kills rises as a vampire? Vampire Apocalypse. Now add in the spectres, wights, and the like. The living don’t have a chance.

    Why Does Anyone Care?

    Is this a real problem? The Dungeon Master (DM) can hand wave (e.g., ignore it) and the problem doesn’t even exist. So why worry about it if it’s a non-issue?

    Some people want “realism” in their game, they want things to make sense. For those that don’t care about realism and things making logical sense? This ruling on how undead spawn is a gold mine of ideas for the DM to use. Following are ideas for limiting the spawning of level draining and carnivorous undead, and how the DM can use the rules to manufacture interesting role playing scenarios.

    Level Draining Undead

    Spectre and wight victims become a half strength undead of the appropriate type under the control of their killer. Vampire victims become an appropriately strengthened vampire under the control of their killer. [Note: the vampire reference indicates that the victim retains their original class, augmented by vampire powers, but this isn’t explained.]

    One way to limit undead proliferation is to limit the number of undead which can be created. One choice is to set the limit equal to each monster’s hit dice, which means a vampire can create and control eight thralls, a spectre can control seven, and a wight can control four. If that’s too much for the campaign, cut the numbers in half to 4, 3, and 2 for vampires, spectres, and wights (respectively).

    What is the rationale for this limit? Undead have a connection to the Negative Material Plane (NMP). The connection is through the master and there is a limit to the amount of energy that can be channeled to the thralls.

    Ghouls and Ghasts

    While the description of ghasts does not indicate they reproduce as do ghouls, the author treats ghasts as “super” ghouls and uses the same rules for both.

    What is the limiting factor for ghouls?

    While hit dice could be easily used the same way as described for level draining undead, it doesn’t “feel” like a good fit. Some other mechanism should be used.

    Time can be used as a limiting factor. What if ghouls have a limited un-life span? They last for a finite period of time, a week, a month, a year? At the end they collapse and molder. Alternately that time limit could start from their last meal of humans, especially if the time span is short, say one week.

    Ghouls could completely destroy the humans in an area, run out of food, and all molder. Or the DM can choose that when ghouls make a kill they immediately begin feasting, which will strictly limit the number of kills made.

    Role Playing Ideas

    Wights are of average intelligence and lawful evil. They are smart enough to understand how to cooperate … and intelligent enough to resent and envy their master.

    Scenario #1:

    A wight has plagued a town, killing all caught outside after dark. The party arrives to deal with the problem, and finds easy clues to track the wight back to its lair, where they dispatch it. Unknown to the party, the thralls of the master wight have been making indiscriminate kills and leaving trails back to the master’s lair. The first night after the party destroys the master, the former thralls go on a killing spree, each producing 4 thralls of its own. The number of wights goes from 5 to 20 in one night!

    Scenario #2:

    Rooting around in an old tomb while looking for valuables, a young adventurer-wannabe was “infected” by the moldering remains of an ancient ghoul. It appeared that a cut got infected and the infection rapidly spread and killed him within a day. Three nights later he rose as a ghoul, broke into the home of his closest friend, and slaughtered him and his family. The ghoul devoured the father but left the bodies of the friend, friend’s mother, and two younger siblings. Three nights later they all arose and raided a friend’s home, slaughtering and devouring all within. The ghouls kill everyone they find, each devour a person, and any others rise three nights later. Within a few weeks the terrified survivors of a once thriving town are badly outnumbered by ravenous ghouls. The party wanders into town and find themselves badly outnumbered.

    Campaign Choices

    In the author’s campaign, when any player character killed by an undead (of any type) the chance of that character rising as undead is 100% unless measures are taken. Do the players know this? Of course not! For new players this will cause consternation and horror. More experienced players should expect something bad to happen and take appropriate measures to avoid problems.

    A parting thought – why would anyone in a D&D world use any treatment for their dead that did not include burning or some other method to ensure the dead will not rise?

    Not Enough Undead?

    What if it’s not enough? What if the DM needs more undead of a given type?

    The classic method is the strongest undead rules the others. Numerous types of undead could be welded together by a strong vampire, mummy, or lich. Or the DM could use multiple levels of thralls of a single undead type.

    One choice is for each thrall have its own thralls, say each can create half as many as its master, e.g., a vampire thrall can create four sub-thralls. Or the DM can produce something like a family tree, where each thrall can have half the number of thralls its master has. Thus a master vampire can have 8 thralls which we can refer to as “children”. Each “child” can have 4 “grandchildren”, each “grandchild” can have of 2 “great grandchildren”, and each “great grandchild” can have 1 “great great grandchild”. Any people killed beyond these numbers are simply dead.

    That’s a lot of vampires!

    Another choice is that when a master vampire is killed its thralls all become master vampires, and each sub-thrall level is bumped up. The party kills the master vampire only to discover they just made things worse, now they have 8 master vampires to deal with. And people previously killed may now rise as vampires now that there are openings in the ranks.

    Another thought is that a group of vampires may not all have the same master. Killing one vampire may have no effect upon the others. Ideas are limitless, bounded only by a DM’s inventiveness. Too complicated? Stick with the original idea of one level of thralls …

    Author’s Note: This article was spawned by a discussion in the August 2010 thread “alternative 1e undead (no energy drain)” started by GengisDon on the Dragonsfoot forums.


    Sidebar: Old School Undead

    Tim Kask – TSR employee #1, editor of the The Dragon magazine, and editor/author for several OD&D supplements and AD&D – has a Q&A thread on the Dragonsfoot forums where he answers a lot of inane questions, including mine. (http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=23223) I posed the following question which he kindly answered.

    BF: I’d like you to make another trip in the Wayback Machine! In reading the descriptions of level draining undead, the MM descriptions typically indicate that victims become half strength monsters under the control of their killer. I always assumed this to mean that they were half hit dice, e.g., a wight’s victim became a 2 HD wight. Is this what was intended, or am I interpreting it incorrectly?

    TK: As I recall, and the memories from back then are very dusty, we (contemporary DM’s) made them half their original HP, or a 2 HD wight, whichever was greater. It was more about turning on their former fellows than any other consideration. As an example, from my old campaign: a fighter-type with 35 HP gets totally drained; he becomes an 18HP, 2HD monster (an oxymoron of sorts). HD were used on one combat table and had to do with ST back then. In the example above, if the afflicted survives (the players flee or drive it off), then the next time encountered, if there is a next time, the former PC-turned-wight is now a 4 HD wight with max HP. But that is just the way I handled it.

    I also ruled that a fresh wight could not immediately know how to drain a full level per touch; during the melee in which they were “created” they can only drain half a level per touch. If, as happened above, it survives to encounter another day, it has full powers.

    Very early on, I seem to recall that an entire low-level party was “wighted”; the original drained a 2nd level, which then drained a 1st level, and so on until the entire party were wights. What fun!

  • Level Draining Is Metagaming

    June 2013

    This article was originally published in & Magazine, Issue 2 in August 2012. Written by Bryan Fazekas.


    This is certainly an inflammatory title for an article. Next to alignment, level draining is possibly the most argued and divisive topic in Dungeons and Dragons. Many players express a horror of level draining that transcends character death – they’d rather have their character killed than level drained.

    What is level draining? In Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (AD&D) level draining is an attack form used by some undead, plus an effect connected to a few magic items and one spell. The effect upon a player character (PC) is to remove one or more levels of experience, including loss of hit points and skills gained at those level(s), plus the loss of the experience points (xp) used to attain those level(s). According to the AD&D Dungeon Masters Guide (DMG) on page 119, a PC’s xp total is reduced to the mid-point of the next lower level.

    The problem is with the last part – experience points. For illustration, we have a pair of 2nd level fighters, one has 4,001 xp and the other has 7,801 xp. Each faces a wight. If both are drained of one level each now has 3,001 xp. Fighter #1 lost 1,000 xp while #2 lost 4,800 xp. For further illustration fighter #3 is 10th level with 740,001 xp – having one level drained reduces her to 375,001 xp, a total loss of 365,000 xp!

    Let’s contrast that. Instead of a wight, the foe is a fighter armed with a long sword. A successful hit on any of the above fighters inflicts 1d8 points of damage regardless of their level or amount of xp.

    Hence the contention that level draining is a form of metagaming, which is using out of game knowledge to dramatically affect the game.

    Replacing Level Draining

    Whether players like level draining or not, level draining undead scare the bejeebers out of everyone. Any replacement mechanism must inspire a similar sense of dread. Hence Mind and Body Draining, which is just as nasty, maybe more so:

    Some undead – notably wights, wraiths, spectres, and vampires – have the ability to drain the mind and/or body when striking a victim. These horrible undead are difficult for even the bravest to approach, and being within touching distance invites long lasting harm.

    Draining undead possess a fear aura – all non-supernatural creatures coming within 30′ of such an undead must save vs. Wand or flee as per the Fear spell, e.g., flee for one round per hit die of the undead. Note that characters making their saving throw will have to save again if that same undead is met during a separate encounter, and characters failing their saving throw must save again when coming within 30′ of that undead.

    The physical attack of these monsters is vampiric in nature, e.g., the number of points inflicted is added to the monster’s hit point total, up to a maximum of double the monster’s normal maximum. Hit points above the normal maximum begin draining away after 6 turns at a rate of one hp/round.

    Far worse, however, is the chilling touch of these monsters which drains the mind and/or body of the victim in addition to inflicting bodily damage. Draining undead leech 1d3 points of strength, intelligence, wisdom, dexterity, constitution, or charisma from their victims on a successful hit! There is equal chance for which attribute a given undead drains – roll 1d6 to determine which. A group of similar undead, e.g., wights, may all drain different attributes.

    Some rare draining undead will drain multiple attributes with a single strike. Roll on the Attributes Drained Table on the next page to determine how many attributes are affected.

    If the undead drains more than one attribute, roll randomly for which attributes are affected (as above). Note that it is possible for a draining undead to drain an attribute doubly or triply. Roll 2d3 or 3d3 for points drained in this case. The most potent draining undead, spectres and vampires, always drain two attributes and may possibly drain three, four, or even six! [Roll twice on the table.]

    Attributes Drained Table

    d100 # Attributes Affected
    01-90 any one attribute affected
    91-99 any two attributes affected
    00 any three attributes affected

    The attribute drains are permanent unless the draining undead is slain by the following dawn. Should that happy event occur the victim may make a saving throw vs. Death Magic for each point lost, with success indicating that a week of bed rest will restore the point. Alternately, a Lesser Restoration, Restoration, Alter Reality, Limited Wish, or Wish will restore the lost attributes, although all but Alter Reality and Wish will require one week of bed rest for each point regained. Restoration, Alter Reality, and Wish will restore the lost attributes even if the undead is not slain within the time limit; Lesser Restoration and Limited Wish will not.

    The worst effect, however, is the Curse of the Damned. Each hit on a victim inflicts a cumulative -1 penalty per die on all “to hit”, damage, saving throw, and other rolls, although all die rolls will be a minimum of 1 per die. Also, any spells or spell-like effects cast by the victim are cast as if the victim were that many levels lower with respect to range, area of effect, and damage. For example, a 5th level magic user struck twice by a wraith would have a -2 on all die rolls and cast spells as if 3rd level. This does not prevent spells from being cast, e.g., this character can still cast a Fireball, but the effects are determined as if the character were 3rd level, and each die of damage is at -2 with a minimum of one point per die. Note that the more powerful draining undead (spectres and vampires) inflict a cumulative -2 penalty. Each application of Remove Curse, cast at a level equal to or higher than the hit dice of the attacking undead, will remove a “-1” of the curse, e.g., the above magic user will require two applications of Remove Curse.

    Note that the effects occur only with the monster’s natural attacks. Should the undead use a weapon there is no draining or curse inflicted, nor do effect occur simply by touching the undead.

    If the character dies while suffering the Curse of the Damned, she will rise again in three days as the type of undead that afflicted her. Should the character be unlucky enough to be cursed by more than one type of draining undead, roll randomly for which she will rise as. Note: If the character is raised from the dead before rising as undead the transformation will still take place. Remove Curse cast upon a dead or newly raised character will prevent her from rising, although it must be cast at a level twice the hit dice of the attacking undead to prevent the transformation.

    Fixing Level Draining

    Many DMs like level draining but think it’s too hard to fix – one of the problems of level draining is that a cleric of 16th level must be available to cast Restoration. In contrast a dead character only needs a cleric of 9th level to cast Raise Dead. The following spell offers a correction for this oddity, a lower level version of Restoration.

    Lesser Restoration

    by David Stairs

    Type: Necromantic
    Level: Cleric 5
    Components: V, S, M
    Range: touch
    Casting Time: 2 rounds
    Duration: Perm
    Saving Throw: none
    Area of Effect: 1 Person

    This is a lesser form of Restoration which has a time limit: it must be cast on the recipient within 1 hour per level of the caster, from the time of the victim’s LAST energy drain. As part of the material components, the recipient must sacrifice a gem worth at least 5,000 GP gem to the god(ess) granting the spell.

    After the preparations are made, which requires a prayer by both the caster and recipient, the recipient makes a saving throw vs. Spells. If the save is successful the most recent level draining is now only temporary, and the lost level(s) will return after 24 hours. If failed, then the level(s) can only be restored with the 7th level Restoration spell, or gaining more experience.

    If the drain was a single level, the save versus Death is at -1. Each casting of the spell allows the regaining of one draining from most recent, to first gained. If being used on a dual drain, the above spell can be used, but the victim makes the save at a -4 penalty.

    Example: Jurgen the paladin was drained four times from 11th level down to 5th level, by two wraiths (2 levels each) and two wights (1 level each). The 2 wights were last in the combat to hit him. Phillius the cleric accepts the sacrifice of a valuable gem for his god and casts Lesser Restoration within 10 hours of the last draining.

    Jurgen’s first save is a 19, and so will gain that level back (from 5th to 6th) after 24 hrs. The second save (for 6th to 7th) unfortunately is a 3 and fails. The third and fourth are both natural 20’s (now why could he not have had those in combat!), and will regain those four levels. At the end of the day he is back to 10th level, but has to wait until Sir Hecktric the High Priest shows up, for a chance at the regular Restoration.

    Note: The level draining for the above spell, refers only to levels lost to undead or other creatures who remove life levels, NOT to age, ability stat reductions, nor to spells/magic items that remove levels.

    Sidebar: What is Metagaming?

    Taken from Wikipedia:

    Metagaming is a broad term usually used to define any strategy, action or method used in a game which transcends a prescribed ruleset, uses external factors to affect the game, or goes beyond the supposed limits or environment set by the game. Another definition refers to the game universe outside of the game itself.

    In simple terms, it is the use of out-of-game information or resources to affect one’s in-game decisions.

    In role-playing games, a player is metagaming when they use knowledge that is not available to their character in order to change the way they play their character (usually to give them an advantage within the game), such as knowledge of the mathematical nature of character statistics, or the statistics of a creature that the player is familiar with but the character has never encountered. In general, it refers to any gaps between player knowledge and character knowledge which the player acts upon.

  • Keeping 1st Level Parties Alive

    June 2013

    This article was originally published in & Magazine, Issue 1 in May 2012. Written by Bryan Fazekas.


    A common lament among Dungeon Masters (DMs) is the difficulty of keeping low level parties alive. Some DMs seem to kill off party after party, which can dampen the fun for both the DM and the players. There are three questions to answer:

    1. Why keep the parties alive?
    2. Why is it so difficult to keep them alive?
    3. What can be done to reduce unnecessary PC mortality at low levels?

    This article addresses these questions from the DM’s point of view. There are things the player can do to avoid death, but that is ground not covered in this article.

    Please note that this article presents nothing new, nothing revolutionary. It is the collective wisdom of numerous DMs accumulated over the nearly 40 years since the original D&D was published. What this article does is present a fresh look at the possible options, collected in one place, so that DMs can pick out anything that appeals to them to try in their campaigns.

    Why Keep PCs Alive?

    Why worry about keeping the PCs alive? A lot of DMs don’t. They cheerfully kill off entire parties with a grin. Some players are fine with rolling up one or more new characters every game session. If everyone is satisfied, nothing is broken, so don’t fix it.

    But not all players are happy with that. Some perceive repeated character death as a mistake on their part, which it may well be. Others feel like they are getting no place. D&D is designed for character advancement and most players want their PCs to advance in level, which of course happens only if the PC isn’t killed off. Some players may feel like they are in competition with, or being treated unfairly by, the DM.

    Having character after character killed can be depressing or aggravating, producing a sense of futility. It’s easy to visualize countless players walking away from D&D after failing repeatedly to keep a PC alive. Driving players away, inadvertently or otherwise, is not in the DM’s best interest.

    This is a problem for the DM as well. If the players all walk away, the campaign folds. Even if they don’t, the DM never realizes the opportunity to DM at higher levels since the party keeps getting reset to level 1.

    So everyone in the campaign, DM and player alike, probably has a vested interest in keeping the PCs alive. Remember, D&D is a game, and the point of a game is to have fun.

    Why So Hard?

    What is so hard about keeping 1st level PCs alive? Let us count the ways!

    1. Low hit points.
    2. Poor armor class.
    3. Low damage potential that lengthens combat.
    4. Lack of player skill.
    5. Limited PC resources and abilities.
    6. Poor matching of the encounters to the party’s abilities.

    Having only a few hit points means that a single attack with an axe, long sword, or broad sword that may inflict as many as 8 hit points of damage is potentially lethal. That kills magic users and thieves outright, kills most clerics and more than half of the fighters. This point isn’t hard to understand.

    Poor armor class is common for low level PCs who do not have the funds to buy better armor and have not acquired magic items. Again, this point isn’t hard to understand.

    Unless the players are lucky or the DM uses a generous character generation method, the party probably does not have much in the way of damage bonuses from strength. As with armor, the party probably hasn’t acquired magic weapons or items to increase their damage potential. The longer it takes to kill a monster, the more likely it will kill one or more PCs. We’re batting 1,000 on the “not difficult to comprehend” score board.

    Point number 4? Yes, poor and/or suicidal choices by players certainly contributes to PC death. However, player actions aren’t addressed in this article – this is all about actions the DM can make to improve their campaign, so we’ll skip this point.

    Limited resources and abilities? The DM must keep in mind that the PCs have few magic items, few spells, and their class abilities will have a relatively low success rate. They will be unlikely to have simple things like silver daggers, making some minor monsters unkillable.

    The last point (#6) is the hardest one to get across to some DMs. They have players at the table so they don’t believe they’re making any mistakes. Yet even if they don’t lose players they receive grumbles about frequent PC death, lack of campaign progression, and other player irritations. The DM should look at the situation objectively to determine if they have a problem. Any idiot can kill PCs – the DM is invincible in their campaign and has an infinite number of monsters to throw at the PCs. Challenging the players requires DM ability. This may require the DM to play the role of coach as well as referee to help players (not PCs) increase in skill.

    Pull Those Punches!

    The easiest way to keep PCs alive is to go easy on them. Ignore die rolls indicating hits on PCs, reduce damage, play the monsters stupidly or cowardly. This keeps the PCs alive and enables the campaign to progress to higher and more exciting levels!

    But at what cost? Mostly long-term fun, assuming that the DM doesn’t stop pulling punches as the PCs progress in level. Eventually the players realize their PCs can’t die. The sense of risk dissipates, and the games become just die rolling, a video game without the screen. For many players and DMs – boring.

    Should the DM never pull punches? That debate is a fierce one with little middle ground. It is the author’s opinion that pulling punches on occasion is fine as long as the players do not realize it is happening. This is typically done when one or more players are having a real run of bad luck, or when the DM misjudges an encounter and makes it more difficult than expected.

    It should not be done to rescue the party from poor play. If the party wants to repeatedly perform foolish actions? Let them! It’s not the DM’s job to keep the PCs alive if they don’t want to be. On the other hand, if one player is acting suicidal in a way that threatens the remainder of the party, pulling punches on the party but not the offending player may be the right thing to do.

    PC Death is OK

    PC death or the real threat of it should happen with some regularity. Why? Without risk, without the chance of PC death the game is a bunch of dice rolling. With the risk of PC death comes the sense of fear, tension, and adventure that makes the game far more interesting.

    D&D is not a video game. The players should not save at a good point, dive in headfirst and get blown away, restart at the saved point. While it might be fun for a while, the lack of risk to the PCs causes the fun to pale and erode. Conversely, killing PCs off every session is eventually counterproductive. It shows the risk is real, but it prevents campaign progression and often puts the players off.

    The obvious choice is to provide the party with some encounters they can win through good play. Make them think and use the tools at hand to succeed. If they fail to play well, PCs may die. If they do play well, PCs may die anyway depending upon the whim of the dice. But the players will gain the sense of accomplishment that comes with good play.

    How To Not Kill Parties

    Following are tips that produce characters more likely to survive.

    Character Generation

    The AD&D Players Handbook (PH) recommends that PCs have at least two ability attributes of at least 15. Given that most attribute bonuses start when the value is 15, this makes sense. For most classes, having a high value for the prime attribute means the PC has a better chance of survival. Fighters have hit and damage bonuses, so they finish opponents quicker. Clerics get bonus spells, magic users have a better chance to know spells, and thieves gain bonuses on their class skills. Having a high constitution, dexterity, and charisma score directly affects PC survival. Constitution bonuses give extra hit points, while dexterity affects both armor class and to-hit with missile weapons. High charisma gives the PC better chances of interacting with NPCs in a desired fashion.

    What can the DM do? Choose a character generation system that produces good PCs. Give the PCs a better chance of survival by giving them the opportunity of generating a PC with better attributes. If a PC is generated that doesn’t have two 15’s, discard that character and start over.

    The in-game rationale for such superior specimens? Exactly that – the PCs are superior specimens, definitely above average in some ways, so the high attributes are appropriate.

    Hit Points

    The more hit points (hp) a PC has, the better his/her chances of survival. Stories circulate about having a fighter with 1 hp. Is there anything more ridiculous? Any hit from anything renders the PC unconscious or dead. Such a PC would never survive training much less an adventure.

    One solution is to award maximum hp at first level. This gives the PCs a better chance of survival, even the magic users who now start with 4 hp plus constitution bonus (if any). Some DMs go as far as awarding maximum hp at each level, and that certainly enhances PC survival.

    Others don’t award maximum hp but instead award hp that are at least half of the class’ HD. For d4 the award is always a 3 or 4, for d6 the award is 4 to 6, for d8 it’s 5 to 8, and for d10 it’s 6 to 10. This also gives the PCs a good chance of survival. Add in a constitution bonus and the odds of long term survival are greater yet.

    The in-game rationale? As with attributes, the PCs are superior specimens, and their training gives them better physical conditioning, stamina, and luck.

    Death Point

    The original idea was that PCs died when they reached 0 hit points. This rule ensures a high PC mortality rate since there is no wiggle room between life and death. When the PC hits 0 they’re dead, roll new character.

    AD&D introduced the idea of death occurring when hit points reach -10. A common ruling is that the PC is unconscious but stable when hit points are between 0 and -2, and at -3 or below the PC loses 1 hit point per round due to bleeding, shock, etc. Administering a Healing Potion or Cure spell, or simple binding of wounds by another character stops the hit point loss.

    This change greatly reduces PC death without making anything easier for them. It also produces role playing situations where the conscious party members must break off combat to tend fallen comrades, and in the post combat time must tend their hurt party members. A further optional rule is to allow the PC’s hit points to go as low as the negative of their constitution score, e.g., if the character’s Con is 18 their hit points can go as low as -18 before death occurs. Depending on typical party constitution scores this will even further reduce PC mortality.

    Starting Money

    An important part of starting a new character is provisioning that character. Dice are rolled for each class to determine starting cash. For fighters a low roll indicates a lack of means to purchase better armor and weapons. This is the same for clerics. For any class it means no funds to purchase protective things such as guard dogs.

    The obvious choice is to set a minimum threshold for starting money, and any roll below that value is automatically increased to the minimum or re-rolled. Alternately the DM may award maximum starting money for each class. Regardless of method used the PC starts with sufficient funds to provision themselves with the best that is available.

    NPCs and Guard Animals

    One way of avoiding death is for the PC to hire/buy a 0-level non-player character (NPC) or a guard animal such as a dog. The idea is that the hireling/animal will assist in combat and will absorb some or all of the damage that would otherwise be inflicted on the PC. Starting money will impact this option as the PC must have sufficient money to hire or purchase.

    In addition the DM must authorize the purchase. Some DMs feel, for whatever reasons, that the PCs need to work on their own and disallow the hire/purchase. Like the options described so far, this generally increases the PC death rate. Allowing the hire/purchase will reduce the re-rolling of PCs.

    Magic Items

    The use of magic items certainly changes the odds in favor of the wielder. Some DMs grant the PCs a chance of starting at first level with a minor magic item appropriate for their class. This will typically be a minor item – a weapon, armor, scroll, potion, or miscellaneous magic.

    Used wisely even a minor magic item may turn the tide of a battle, snatching victory from the jaws of death. Here the DM must choose wisely to avoid granting the PCs too much power. Items should be relatively minor or with limited charges, say a Wand of Magic Missiles with 5 charges that fires 3 missiles per charge expended. The wielder must conserve the wand for real need or be without the item when a truly dangerous encounter confronts them.

    Starting at Higher Level

    Many DMs do not start their campaign at 1st level. They may choose to start the PCs at 2nd level, which doubles their hit points and gives them additional abilities include spells. Some start the PCs at 3rd or 4th level, which grant even more initial hit points and class abilities.

    Editor’s Note: see & Magazine Issue 1 for Andrew Hamilton’s article “Starting at Level One ~ Why Bother?.

    This idea is the author’s least favorite of all the methods described in this document, barring the idea of going easy on the PC. There is a “magic” of playing that 1st level character with so little margin between life and death. But if the campaign has excessively high 1st level fatalities it may be in the best interests of the campaign to start at a higher level.

    Alternately, some campaigns start intentionally at even higher levels, even name level. The idea is to play a higher level party and may have nothing to do with avoiding death at 1st level.

    Raising the Dead

    Ok, all DM tactics failed and a PC is killed. What next? One answer is to roll up a new PC to replace them. Another is to make available Raise Dead or Resurrection.

    In many campaigns the availability of such higher level magics to low level PCs is nil. Some feel that it’s a “get out of jail free” card and gives the players too much.

    Restoring a PC to life doesn’t have to be easy, simple, or cheap. A common tactic is to require a high payment in either gold or magic items. Such may exhaust the party’s funds, forcing them back into a dungeon to score more loot. A better choice for the DM is to require service or a quest as part or all of the price of the Raise Dead or Resurrection. This makes it more expensive for the PCs, and more importantly, gives the DM a solid hook into the next adventure, possibly several adventures. It also gives the PCs an option for a mentor, friend, sage, etc., which can be exploited for many role-playing situations by a smart DM. Just as importantly, the players give their DM a solid rationale, a priceless thing. A smart DM will capitalize on such gifts from the players.

    Planning Appropriate Encounters

    While the preceding ideas are all valuable tools for the DM, nothing surpasses good judgment on the part of the DM. While some advocate total randomness on the part of the DM, the author believes that is laziness. It requires no thought or skill to roll the dice, and the DM is as likely to produce an encounter far too easy for the party as one too hard. The likelihood of generating encounters that are in a sweet spot of the range between just a bit too difficult or too easy is low.

    It is a mistake to make every encounter a “killer” encounter. The party either runs from everything – which is hardly fun for the DM or the players – or the party suffers a constant high mortality with the consequences already listed.

    Some encounters should be easy for the party although it is a good device to make the encounter appear more difficult than it really is. Such encounters often produce interesting role playing situations where the party may back down from or bribe an inferior monster that they do not recognize.

    It is also useful to confront the party with encounters they cannot defeat. The phrase from Monty Python and the Holy Grailrun away! – should be considered a good tactic by the party in some situations. This produces interesting role playing situations where the party may flee, throw down distractions such as food or valuables, or attempt to bribe a monster to not kill them.

    But the DM must provide the players with a possibility of successfully dealing with each situation. Please note that “successfully dealing” with a situation does not mean defeating the monster. It may involve that, but it may just as easily mean treating with a monster, bribing a monster, or running like the wind. If the DM does not provide that “out”, PC mortality increases.

    Summary

    PC death makes the play more exciting for everyone but pulling out a victory from the jaws of defeat is even more exciting. It’s a fine line that the DM must walk.

    Each DM has their own opinion and tolerance for rules which will reduce PC mortality at low levels. The above ideas are a collection of ideas used by a wide variety of DMs – it’s not likely any DM will use all of them, nor is it recommended. Each DM needs to find their own comfort zone of which rules to implement, which to ignore, and should remember that trying a rule doesn’t mean it has to be a permanent fixture of the campaign. Rules that don’t work should be discarded in favor of ones that do.


    Sidebar: You Can’t Fix Stupid

    When isn’t it ok to keep the party alive? When they are playing poorly or when one or more PCs is performing actions likely to result in PC death.

    This depends heavily upon player experience. With beginners it may be appropriate to pull punches, to ask questions like, “are you sure you want to stick your head in that thing’s mouth?”, to provide a bit of foreshadowing as a warning. With experienced players it may also be appropriate to ask the questions and give foreshadowing, to give the player a chance to re-think an action.

    If they proceed anyway? As comedian Ron White says, “you can’t fix stupid”. Don’t save the party from their own folly?

    What if one player is derailing the campaign by repeatedly doing suicidal things? Same answer – let them do it and face the consequences. But avoid spreading those fatal results to the remainder of the party. If a player keeps getting themselves killed, but no one else is harmed? Ideally they’ll learn to play better or will quit.


    This page last updated: 05 June 2013

    Copyright 2013 Bryan Fazekas

  • Extendable Rules for Turning Undead

    October 2006

    This article was written in December 2005, formalizing ideas I had used many moons ago. Originally published in Footprints, published by Dragonsfoot, I’m republishing it here in HTML format.

    Copyright 1990, 2005-2006, 2011-2014 by Bryan Fazekas, all rights reserved. This document may not be published or reproduced in any fashion except with explicit permission of the author.

    March 2011

    Due to a question in the Yahoo Group FirstEditonDND I added Table U5 Part III to cover clerics up to level 30.

    Note: For ease of use, I created a summarized version of this rule.


    Back in the day …

    The cleric table for turning undead, Dungeon Master’s Guide (DMG) page 75, was originally written when AD&D was newly published, and the Monster Manual (MM) was THE source for all monsters. That table listed 12 undead plus the “Special” entry, which covered evil creatures of the lower planes with suggestions for which lower plane monsters were exempt from turning. At that time it covered all the known undead creatures and it functioned well.

    Things were great, right? Yes they were! Unfortunately, they didn’t stay that way for long …

    Rather quickly problems reared their ugly heads! For instance, how does the DM handle the situation if a more powerful skeleton is created? Say an NPC animates a hill giant skeleton as a 6 hit die monster. Does a cleric turn it as the 1 HD skeleton, or turn it as a mummy, which is 6+3 HD? Then comes the Fiend Folio (FF) and the Monster Manual II (MMII) with more undead creatures. And what about the banshee (groaning spirit) in the MM that wasn’t included in the list of undead? Many DMs, including myself, adapted by using an undead monster that had the same hit dice as the new undead monster.

    This worked but didn’t exactly feel right. Using the above example, although I treated a 6 HD skeleton as a mummy for turning, it didn’t really fit because a mummy is a FAR more dangerous foe.

    A closer examination of the MM undead list shows other discrepancies. Table U1 lists the MM undead in the order presented in the turning table along with their hit dice. Zombies and ghouls have the same hit dice but have different turning values. The ghast has less hit dice than the wight but has a higher turning value.

    Table U1 — Undead Monsters and Hit Dice

    Undead Type Hit Dice
    Skeleton 1
    Zombie 2
    Ghoul 2
    Shadow 3+3
    Wight 4+3
    Ghast 4
    Wraith 5+3
    Mummy 6+3
    Spectre 7+3
    Vampire 8+3
    Ghost 10
    Lich 11+
    Special

     

    So, a new ranking system for turning undead is needed, one that fairly ranks the existing undead monster AND helps the DM handle non-standard ones. The obvious conclusion is that hit dice alone is not a sufficient criterion for ranking undead for the purpose of turning by a cleric. So what is the criteria?

    Ranking the Undead

    I continued my examination by listing the special defenses and attacks of each undead, as that seemed to be a good place to start. Table U2 lists the undead from the MM, including the banshee but excluding Special (which can’t really be classified), and adds the undead from the MMII and the FF. Note: The demilich, haunt, phantom, and revenant are not included as they cannot be turned.

    The list shows a lot of commonality, things like requiring silver/magic weapons to hit and special attacks such as draining (strength, levels, etc.). Also, a few undead monsters have low armor class and/or magic resistance.

    Table U2 — Undead Special Abilities

    Base HD Undead Creature Special Attacks Special Defenses
    1/2 Poltergeist silver or magic to hit
    1 Skeleton
    1-1 Skeleton, Animal
    2 Coffer Corpse magic to hit
    2 Ghoul paralyzation
    2 Huecuva disease silver or magic to hit
    2 Zombie
    3 Sheet Phantom
    3+12 Zombie, Juju magic to hit
    3+3 Shadow drain strength magic to hit
    4 Ghast paralyzation
    4 Penanggalan
    4 Son of Kyuss disease regeneration
    4+2 Sheet Ghoul
    4+3 Wight energy drain (1) silver or magic to hit
    5+3 Wraith energy drain (1) silver or magic to hit
    6 Crypt Thing magic to hit
    6 Zombie, Monster
    6+3 Mummy disease magic to hit
    7 Groaning Spirit death wail AC0, 50% magic resistance, magic to hit
    7+3 Spectre energy drain (2) magic to hit
    8 Appirition silver or magic to hit, AC0
    8+3 Vampire energy drain (2) magic to hit, regenerate
    9 Death Knight 75% magic resistance, AC0
    9+ Skeleton Warrior magic to hit, 90% magic resistance
    10 Ghost age victim AC0, silver or magic to hit
    11+ Lich magic to hit, AC0
    12 Eye of Fear & Flame

     

    Most of the special abilities have to do with the connection to the Negative Plane. Skeletons taking half damage from edged weapons and the ghasts’ stench are significant exceptions, which I later decided to exclude as they result from the physical properties of the respective monsters rather than an “undead ability” like the other special abilities. [Personally, a ghast’s stench attack is more a matter of poor personal hygiene …]

    This provided a basis for creating a metric which determines the relative strength of each undead. I used hit dice as a basis for comparison, as it is the standard indicator of monster strength. Then I added hit dice modifiers based upon special abilities. See Table U3 for the list of hit dice modifiers used.

    Table U3 — Adjusted Hit Dice Modifiers

    Special Ability

    Description

    age victim 1 point for aging the victim
    armor class 1 point for every 2 points of AC below 2, e.g., AC0 is 1 point, AC-2 is 2 points, etc.
    death wail 1 point
    inflict disease 1 point
    drain energy level 1 point
    drain attribute 1 point for each attribute drained, e.g., if a monster drains strength AND constitution that counts as 2 points.
    magic resistance 1 point for every 25% of magic resistance, e.g., 1% to 25% is 1 point, 26% to 50% is 2 points, etc.
    paralyzation 1 point
    regeneration 1 point
    silver or magic weapon to hit 1 point per plus required to hit, so silver or +1 weapon is 1 point, +2 weapon to hit is 2 points, etc.

     

    To generate the “base” HD, I dropped any pluses just to simplify things. Next, I added 1 point for each special ability as this reflects additional power. This results in an undead monster’s Adjusted Hit Die (AHD) score. Table U4 lists the results for each undead, sorted by the AHD.

    Table U4 — Undead Adjusted Hit Dice

    Undead Creature Base HD # Special Abilities Adjusted HD
    Poltergeist 1/2 1 1
    Skeleton 1 0 1
    Skeleton, Animal 1-1 0 1
    Zombie 2 0 2
    Coffer Corpse 2 1 3
    Ghoul 2 1 3
    Sheet Phantom 3 0 3
    Huecuva 3 1 4
    Penanggalan 4 0 4
    Sheet Ghoul 4+2 0 4
    Zombie, Juju 3+12 1 4
    Ghast 4 1 5
    Shadow 3+3 2 5
    Son of Kyuss 4 2 6
    Wight 4+3 2 6
    Zombie, Monster 6 0 6
    Crypt Thing 6 1 7
    Wraith 5+3 2 7
    Mummy 6+3 2 8
    Spectre 7+3 2 9
    Apparition 8 2 10
    Vampire 8+3 3 11
    Eye of Fear & Flame 12 0 12
    Groaning Spirit 7 5 12
    Death Knight 9 4 13
    Ghost 10 3 13
    Lich 11+ 2 13+
    Skeleton Warrior 9+ 5 14+

     

    A quick review of Table U4 shows that it appears to make sense. The undead monsters from the MM are mostly in their original order, although the shadow and ghast now have the same turning value while the wight is now harder to turn than the ghast. But “sanity check” of the special abilities listed in Table U2, the AHD does make sense in defining the strength of undead monsters in deciding which is more difficult for a cleric to turn.

    Let’s check to see if this system is balanced, whether it ranks new monsters in terms of relative strength. So we create a 5+5 HD zombie that drains strength on each hit and is immune to non-magical weapons. It’s base HD is 5 which gets adjusted upward to 7 for two special abilities. The wraith has an AHD of 7 — is this monster equivalent to a wraith? A brief comparison of difficulty to fight indicates that they are fairly equivalent.

    Just as importantly, this also handles the need that originally pushed me to experiment — it is extensible. I can create ANY undead with any hit dice and any special abilities, and easily figure out what value a cleric of any level needs to roll to turn it.

    More rules could be added to try to rank the undead even more “fairly”, but more rules complicate things quickly. I did some experimentation with other factors but quickly realized I was going to have to invent a percentile system to handle the rolling, which I felt was too complicated.

    New Turning Table

    Now that the undead monsters are ranked, both those that we know about and those that haven’t been invented yet, it’s time to determine what the turning table looks like.

    I started with the original Turning Table from the DMG. It made a lot of sense, but I felt that some of the progression values were a bit skewed. So I modified the progression slightly, starting with 20 and working backwards in increments of 3. Keeping the ability to turn a skeleton at 1st level about the same (my table requires an 11 while the original requires a 10), I worked from there, giving the cleric the ability to turn an additional AHD of undead for each additional level of experience.

    This gives a cleric a 50% chance of turning an undead whose AHD is the same as the cleric’s level, and the cleric still has a chance to turn an undead up to 3 AHD higher than his current level.

    Table U5 shows the new Matrix for Clerics Affecting Undead. The first column shows the AHD, which along with cleric level of experience is the real driver for the table. The second column lists the known undead to simplify use. As other undead are added to a campaign the Undead Type column can be penciled in.

    Table U5 — Matrix for Clerics Affecting Undead (Revised), Part I

    Cleric Level †
    AHD Undead Type 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
    1 Poltergeist, Skeleton, Animal Skeleton 11 8 5 2 T T T D D D
    2 Zombie 14 11 8 5 2 T T T D D
    3 Coffer Corpse, Ghoul, Sheet Phantom 17 14 11 8 5 2 T T T D
    4 Huecuva, Penanggalan, Sheet Ghoul, Juju Zombie 20 17 14 11 8 5 2 T T T
    5 Ghast, Shadow 20 17 14 11 8 5 2 T T
    6 Son of Kyuss, Wight, Monster Zombie 20 17 14 11 8 5 2 T
    7 Crypt Thing, Wraith 20 17 14 11 8 5 2
    8 Mummy 20 17 14 11 8 5
    9 Spectre 20 17 14 11 8
    10 Apparition 20 17 14 11
    11 Vampire 20 17 14
    12 Eye Of Fear & Flame, Groaning Spirit 20 17
    13 Death Knight, Ghost, Lich 20
    14 Skeleton Warrior
    15 ??
    16 ??
    17 ??
    18 ??
    19 ??
    20 ??
    21 ??
    22 ??
    23+ ??

    Table U5 — Matrix for Clerics Affecting Undead (Revised), Part II

    Cleric Level †
    AHD Undead Type 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
    1 Poltergeist, Skeleton, Animal Skeleton D1 D1 D1 D2 D2 D2 D3 D3 D3 D3
    2 Zombie D D1 D1 D1 D2 D2 D2 D3 D3 D3
    3 Coffer Corpse, Ghoul, Sheet Phantom D D D1 D1 D1 D2 D2 D2 D3 D3
    4 Huecuva, Penanggalan, Sheet Ghoul, Juju Zombie D D D D1 D1 D1 D2 D2 D2 D3
    5 Ghast, Shadow T D D D D1 D1 D1 D2 D2 D2
    6 Son of Kyuss, Wight, Monster Zombie T T D D D D1 D1 D1 D2 D2
    7 Crypt Thing, Wraith T T T D D D D1 D1 D1 D2
    8 Mummy 2 T- T T D D D D1 D1 D1
    9 Spectre 5 2 T T T D D D D1 D1
    10 Apparition 8 5 2 T T T D D D D1
    11 Vampire 11 8 5 2 T T T D D D
    12 Eye Of Fear & Flame, Groaning Spirit 14 11 8 5 2 T T T D D
    13 Death Knight, Ghost, Lich 17 14 11 8 5 2 T T T D
    14 Skeleton Warrior 20 17 14 11 8 5 2 T T T
    15 ?? 20 17 14 11 8 5 2 T T
    16 ?? 20 17 14 11 8 5 2 T
    17 ?? 20 17 14 11 8 5 2
    18 ?? 20 17 14 11 8 5
    19 ?? 20 17 14 11 8
    20 ?? 20 17 14 11
    21 ?? 20 17 14
    22 ?? 20 17
    23+ ?? 20

    Table U5 — Matrix for Clerics Affecting Undead (Revised), Part III

    Cleric Level †
    AHD Undead Type 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
    1 Poltergeist, Skeleton, Animal Skeleton D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3
    2 Zombie D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3
    3 Coffer Corpse, Ghoul, Sheet Phantom D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3
    4 Huecuva, Penanggalan, Sheet Ghoul, Juju Zombie D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3
    5 Ghast, Shadow D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3
    6 Son of Kyuss, Wight, Monster Zombie D2 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3
    7 Crypt Thing, Wraith D2 D2 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3
    8 Mummy D2 D2 D2 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3
    9 Spectre D1 D2 D2 D2 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3
    10 Apparition D1 D1 D2 D2 D2 D3 D3 D3 D3 D3
    11 Vampire D1 D1 D1 D2 D2 D2 D3 D3 D3 D3
    12 Eye Of Fear & Flame, Groaning Spirit D D1 D1 D1 D2 D2 D2 D3 D3 D3
    13 Death Knight, Ghost, Lich D D D1 D1 D1 D2 D2 D2 D3 D3
    14 Skeleton Warrior D D D D1 D1 D1 D2 D2 D2 D3
    15 ?? T D D D D11 D1 D1 D2 D2 D2
    16 ?? T T D D D D1 D1 D1 D2 D2
    17 ?? T T T D D D D1 D1 D1 D2
    18 ?? 2 T T T D D D D1 D1 D1
    19 ?? 5 S T T T D D D D1 D1
    20 ?? 8 5 2 T T T D D D D1
    21 ?? 11 8 5 2 T T T D D D
    22 ?? 14 11 8 5 2 T T T D D
    23+ ?? 17 14 11 8 5 2 T T T D

    Author’s Note: Readers will note that when I added Table U5 Part III the monster level (AHD) wasn’t increased. At this time I don’t see a need, but if there’s a call to do so I’ll add more rows to the table.

    Notes:

    Paladins turn undead as a cleric two levels below their own.
    ?? No undead creature with an AHD of this value existed at the time this article was written.

    Rules for Turning:

    When turning or commanding into service undead creatures locate the entry for the cleric’s level and the adjusted hit dice of the monster. Following are the instructions for each value:

    The cleric has no chance of turning or commanding this monster.
    <nn> If this number or greater is rolled on a 1d20 the cleric has turned or commanded 1-12 (d12) undead. If turned the affected number will move away from the cleric at maximum speed, or if unable to do so will move as far from the cleric as possible.
    T Indicates the cleric automatically turns 1-12 (1d12) undead.
    D Instead of turning the undead the cleric destroys 1-12 (1d12) of them.
    D1 Same as D, but the number destroyed is 7-12 (1d6+6).
    D2 Same as D, but the number destroyed is 8-18 (2d6+6).
    D3 Same as D, but the number destroyed is 14-24 (2d6+12).

     

    A comparison of Table U5 with the original Turning table shows that the cleric has somewhat less power to turn or command undead at lower levels. This was not by design, but I’m not displeased with the way it worked out. I’ve always thought that clerics turned undead too easily, requiring the DM to hit a party with undead that were stronger than the party was really capable of handling, just to get around the problem of the cleric turning the undead easily.

    The original table clumps cleric levels together starting at 9th, but since the new table is based in part upon AHD, I chose to not group cleric levels. I did choose to make the table run as high as 20th level cleric, which corresponding pushed the AHD to 23. Currently I don’t believe that it is necessary to extend the table past either maximum, but am learned enough to know that setting a hard limit is the best way to get someone to exceed it, so the table can easily be extended to any cleric level or AHD desired.

    Part 2 of Table U5 allows for higher level clerics to automatically destroy greater numbers of undead. This balances the slight loss of power in lower level clerics. At lower levels the clerics cannot turn some of the more powerful undead, but at higher levels they can destroy more undead. At the same time it doesn’t unbalance the game — a 20th level cleric can destroy 14-24 skeletons of 1 HD, which is cool. But what DM is going to throw 1 HD skeletons against a cleric that powerful??? [Well, *I* might, but there’d be 200 skeletons in the group, so the automatic destruction of 14-24 wouldn’t have all that much effect!]

    Handling Special Creatures

    One thing the new table doesn’t address is the handling of the “Special” entry of the original table. There are a couple of ways to handle that. One is to stick with the original rules, which indicate that a creature of the lower planes is immune if it fulfills any of the three following criteria:

    AC -5 or better ** OR **
    11 or more HD ** OR **
    66% or greater magic resistance

    But this won’t really work, as there is no longer a “Special” entry in the table. It makes more sense to handle creatures of the lower planes like any undead — use the monster’s hit dice as the basis and adjust that value based upon special abilities. This throws out the hit dice criteria for Special creatures, but it makes the case for considering armor class and magic resistance.

    So the creatures of the lower planes should be treated like undead, and since they bring new special abilities to the table, the list of specials abilities to include in figuring the AHD is listed in Table U3.

    The above rules make turning lower planar creatures difficult in general, and powerful ones near impossible, and singular creatures such as demon lords virtually impossible even for the highest level clerics. But this is good for game balance.

    It has been noted in some articles that if lower planar creatures can be affected by clerics, so can upper planar creatures. So an evil cleric may have a chance to turn a deva, or command into service a devil. And a good cleric may have the chance to command into service any upper planar creature.

    It should be noted that commanding any intelligent creature against its will is likely to create resentment, so when the commanding period ends the commanded creature may consider the cleric an enemy.

    Situational Modifiers

    The above rules may be modified for situation. A cleric in a place of power for his deity or alignment should have additional ability to turn undead. Due to the composition of the table I would not grant a bonus to the roll as is done for combat and saving throws. A 1st level cleric has no chance to turn shadow so adding 2 (or 10) to the roll doesn’t help. Instead grant additional levels of turning ability for the situation.

    For instance, our first level cleric is attacked by a shadow in a shrine of a the cleric’s deity. That cleric has no chance to turn the shadow. But since he is defending a shrine to his deity I would grant him an additional number of levels of turning ability. Let’s assume the cleric is a faithful follower of his deity and does everything a proper cleric should — so I grant him 2 additional levels, so he in that specific situation he would be able to turn the shadow as a 3rd level cleric. Instead of having no chance he turns the shadow on 17. Not a great chance of turning, but certainly better than nothing.

    If instead of a shrine the location was a major temple, the additional turning ability for a very devout cleric might be increased by 4 levels, depending if the deity is a major god and the importance of the temple to that deity. Or if the cleric was not in the good graces of his deity the granted value might be less, nothing at all, or even a negative.

    In the same fashion, if that same cleric was fighting undead in a temple of an opposing deity, his ability to turn undead might be reduced by similar amounts. Or attempting to turn a lich in the lich’s lair may impose a significant penalty.

    It’s all up to the DM’s interpretation …


    This page last updated: 12 August 2011

    Copyright 2007, 2011 Bryan Fazekas