Let's Read...Everything D&D!

[ronaldsf]

The forward also talks about "Monty Hall" campaigns and how the stats for gods are meant to demonstrate how absurd characters above 40th level or so are. This seems to imply that gods are meant to be the ultimate challenge to be overcome.

Heh -- and the response of many joyous gamers was to think: "If it now has stats, I can kill it!"

And since there was little information given on the religions and their practices, why else publish the book? It seems like the idea that "Gods are so powerful, they don't have stats" and GM fiat regarding world-building and gods would come up later.

And is it me, or shouldn't the word "forward" be "foreword" in these early books?

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

And is it me, or shouldn't the word "forward" be "foreword" in these early books?

That's my mistake, not theirs. Either me just flaking on the proper spelling or an auto-correct fail.

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (1st Edition) Monster Manual

Originally published December, 1977

Version being read and reviewed: Monster Manual 1st Edition Premium Reprint (July, 2012)

Bestiaries and Monster Manuals and such are always a bit of a beast (pun intended) to read so I'm going to touch on the highlights of the critters included here-in rather than analyze each and every monster entry.

The full title of this book is...

Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Special Reference Work: Monster Manual - AN ALPHABETICAL COMPENDIUM OF ALL OF THE MONSTERS FOUND IN ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, INCLUDING ATTACKS, DAMAGE, SPECIAL ABILITIES, AND DESCRIPTIONS. By Gary Gygax.

(Caps are theirs, not mine.)

Interesting side note - the Premium Reprint includes the printing/edition note for the 4th edition (as in, 4th revision of this specific book, not 4E D&D), originally printed in August, 1979.

The foreword (spelled it right this time), by Mike Carr, starts off with the more usual "thank you fans" one tends to see in forewords, rather than the odd potpourri of topics in the original edition booklets. The fourth paragraph deviates from the positive tone, however, cautioning against straying from official D&D products into the murky waters of imitators. Do I sense the beginnings of TSR's negative attitude toward third party publishers? The foreword rounds out with a DM advisory to not let players reference this book during play.

We then have a preface by Gary Gygax, acknowledging the contributions of others, particularly his wife, who apparently did most of the typing.

Explanatory Notes are up next. Nothing terribly exciting here except the definition of monster (any being encountered, human, demi-human, or otherwise, is considered a monster during an encounter) and magic resistance, which has a base value that varies based on the level of the spellcaster attempting to overcome. The base value assumes an 11th level magic-user and goes up 5% per level below 11th and down 5% per level above 11. Nice and confusing.

And, finally, the critters.

One thing that strikes me off the top is that many creatures have notes in their descriptions about market value, either of the creature itself, its eggs or young, or body parts like pelts. I remember similar values being present in BECMI but have rarely seen that aspect of creatures explored in modern editions (3.0 and later).

Some creatures seem to be specifically designed to be "gotcha" monsters that punish players for using specific abilities. Brain moles, for example, feed on psionic energy, and are relatively harmless to non-psionic characters. Cerebral parasites are another anti-psionic critter...I wonder if Gary had something against the inclusion of psionics in the game? Thought eater - ethereal skeletal platypus that feeds on psionic energy - what in the name of Gygax inspired this monstrosity?

There's also a few creatures that I don't recall seeing again in later editions, like the Brownie.

One element I like is the small details about lairs and what sort of more powerful creatures may be encountered depending on numbers. This generally applies to humanoids, as with the bugbear, which has notes on leaders, chiefs, and sub-chiefs. Unfortunately, female humanoids are generally noted as less effective or entirely non-combatant. From a pseudo-realism standpoint, I can see where that might be the case for certain humanoid cultures, but not all of them. However, this book is a product of its time (1977) so it gets a pass (mostly).

Demons! As noted in a previous review, I really like the demons' amulets idea and adapted it for my own campaigns. I can see why it was dropped in later editions, but I think it adds a nifty little touch of occultism to the game (and maybe that's why it was dropped given the Satanism scare associated with the game in the 80s). Among the demon superstars detailed in this tome are Demogorgon, Juiblex, Orcus, and Yeenoghu, along with the succubus, manes, and Types I through VI, who all get names now, in addition to the generic "types." Thus the Balor finally takes its place as demon, rather than a disembodied head. However, nifty little side note, Type IV, Type V, and Type VI are noted as being Nalfeshnee, etc; Marilith, etc; and Balor, etc; implying that these terms are proper names and that other names are possible for these demon types. Marilith (as a proper name) made an appearance in the original Final Fantasy video game with an appearance nearly identical to the demon, adding further credence to the idea that these are individual names.

Devils! Devils have a similar item to the demons' amulets, in the form of talismans with similar properties. In addition to lesser and greater devils we have a few arch-devils: Baalzebul, Dispater, Geryon, and the "Overlord of all the dukes of Hell," Asmodeus. Erinyes make their debut as devils (as opposed to the crone-like beings in Gods, Demigods, & Heroes).

Dinosaurs! Quite a few of these terrible lizards running around in the MM, though their descriptions are quite brief.

Dolphins are noted as being Very Intelligent (which, according to the Explanatory Notes, indicates a score of 11-12), an interesting nod toward dolphins being as intelligent as humans, a belief that hasn't gained much traction in the real world until recently. Its also worth noting that 3.0 made dolphins as stupid as other animals, with an Intelligence score of 2.

Dragons! The classic five chromatic and five metallic dragons, plus Tiamat and Bahamut, can be found here in all their glory. Only 8 age categories at this point, I'm not sure when they graduated to 12. There's a fairly extensive section on subduing dragons and effectively enslaving them to be used as labor or to be sold on the open market. Tiamat has moved to the Nine Hells from her old abode underground in the original edition. Bahamut, meanwhile, dwells "behind the east wind" which is noted as being an unknown planar location.

Skipping ahead a bit, I find hobgoblins particularly interesting as they provide a fairly good reason why an intelligent, Lawful Evil humanoid culture would not dominate the other races - in-fighting between tribes. Something else of note, hobgoblins here have a dwarven-esque suite of detection abilities related to mining that they lost in later editions. Seems an unfortunate loss of character for this race, which has always been one of my favorite "bad guy" races.

Speaking of favorites, the Ixitxachitl (good luck pronouncing that) is another long time favorite of mine. I always found it intriguing that they can have class levels (specifically cleric) despite being non-humanoid. The vampiric variant also tickled my fancy.

Kobolds! Dogs or dragon-ling reptiles? The description indicates neither, while the illustration clearly lends itself to the dog-like appearance.

Larvae are an odd critter - soul-currency of the lower planes. Another semi-forgotten idea that I think has a lot of traction and would like to have seen carried forward in later editions.

Leprechauns provide us an amusing fourth-wall break as the illustration has one of them sitting on their entry's name and another apparently stealing the reference indicator at the top of the page (Leucrotta, which the little guy has tilted diagonally). Like the brownie, however, these little fey were largely left behind in later editions.

Men! Humans of various sorts as monsters. One of the more useful, in my opinion, entries in the book, with everything from bandits to pilgrims.

Mummies are quite unusual in this edition compared to later editions in that they are connected to the positive material plane. One wonders if that was a typo of some sort since they otherwise conform to their undead status and have their usual debilitating powers, including the dreaded mummy rot disease.

Allow me to get back on the gender issue for just a moment with the nymph - there may be some mythological precedent for this creature's powers, but it still annoys me a bit that the exclusively female nymph's special power is her beauty and that she kills anyone who sees her nude.

Orcs are Lawful Evil here. Interesting.

I remember reading a Forgotten Realms novel where the author was describing the native flora of various sorts, including a Spanish something or other. Bam! Immersion in the story ruined. Why would a plant on a fantasy non-Earth world be named for an Earth culture? Same thing applies to the Portugese Man-O-War in this book. I know (from looking it up on Wikipedia just now) that this thing isn't technically a jellyfish, but, from a game mechanics standpoint, they are pretty much the same thing. So, why not just call it a giant jellyfish? (Mini and somewhat pointless realism rant done, we now return you to your regularly scheduled review.)

Its interesting that sahuagin get a special "History and Legend" section when no other creature in the book does.

The book ends with an Appendix/table for treasure types and, wonder of wonders, an index.

Despite this being the first book for Advanced D&D, the monster entries here seem fairly compatible with original D&D. I know I adapted them and used them as inspiration for my BECMI campaigns for many years (I never played AD&D but owned this book and Monster Manual II).

Next up: Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (1st Edition) Player's Handbook

 

[Shiroiken]

The foreword (spelled it right this time), by Mike Carr, starts off with the more usual "thank you fans" one tends to see in forewords, rather than the odd potpourri of topics in the original edition booklets. The fourth paragraph deviates from the positive tone, however, cautioning against straying from official D&D products into the murky waters of imitators. Do I sense the beginnings of TSR's negative attitude toward third party publishers? The foreword rounds out with a DM advisory to not let players reference this book during play.

This was because of the glut of homebrew that was available for OD&D. A prime point of OD&D was that it could by fully modified by DMs, and they usually shared their work (often in The Dragon). Part of the point behind AD&D was to have a fully detailed rules system that should not be modified, which makes it ideal for tournament play. Since this was the first book for AD&D, it makes sense that it would be included, and IIRC, it was included in the PHB and DMG.

Some creatures seem to be specifically designed to be "gotcha" monsters that punish players for using specific abilities. Brain moles, for example, feed on psionic energy, and are relatively harmless to non-psionic characters. Cerebral parasites are another anti-psionic critter...I wonder if Gary had something against the inclusion of psionics in the game? Thought eater - ethereal skeletal platypus that feeds on psionic energy - what in the name of Gygax inspired this monstrosity?

"Gotcha" monsters (and abilities) were usually meant to balance out certain aspects of the game. Usually the Fighter was the powerhouse of the group, until they met a Rust Monster, then the Barbarian or Magic User would be the star. The beholder likewise punished spellcasters, unless they were careful. As for psionic gotcha monsters, in AD&D, psionics were just a bonus ability for those who were lucky at character creation, so these monsters were basically there as a counter balance for the rest of the time.

Despite this being the first book for Advanced D&D, the monster entries here seem fairly compatible with original D&D. I know I adapted them and used them as inspiration for my BECMI campaigns for many years (I never played AD&D but owned this book and Monster Manual II).

OD&D, AD&D 1E, BECMI, and AD&D2 were fairly compatible with each other by design. When 2E came out, they said in The Dragon, that 1E Assassins, Barbarians, Cavaliers, Monks, and Thief-Acrobats were fully playable in 2E with only a little bit of conversion work on the part of the DM. Adventures were IME, the easiest and best thing to convert between editions.

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (1st Edition) Player's Handbook

Originally published June, 1978

Version being read and reviewed: Player's Handbook 1st Edition Premium Reprint (July, 2012)

The full title of this book is...

Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Special Reference Work: Player's Handbook - A COMPILED VOLUME OF INFORMATION FOR PLAYERS OF ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, INCLUDING: CHARACTER RACES, CLASSES, AND LEVEL ABILITIES; SPELL TABLES AND DESCRIPTIONS; EQUIPMENT COSTS; WEAPONS DATA; AND INFORMATION ON ADVENTURING. By Gary Gygax.

(Caps are theirs, not mine.)

Mike Carr's foreword praises the diversity and intelligence of D&D players. As you may have guessed if you've been reading these reviews, gender issues are near and dear to my heart so I tend to notice when a D&D book calls them out. Here we have a note, "D&D players, happily, come in all shapes and sizes, and even a fair number of women are counted among those who regularly play the game." For 1978, I suppose the fact that women played at all was rather remarkable. At any rate, the foreword ends with a few suggestions for players to be even better players - Be organized, defer to the DM, cooperate with the other players, give advance notice when you're going to be absent, and get in the spirit of the game.

After the Table of Contents, Gary gives us a preface describing how daunting a task putting together this book and the Dungeon Master's Guide was. Back on gender, a couple of paragraphs in, Gary says, "You will find no pretentious dictums herein, no baseless limits arbitrarily placed on female strength or male charisma, " Except that there are limits on female strength and no such limits on charisma. One wonders what Gary's definition of "arbitrary" was. Moving on, Gary also states his apparent dislike for spell point systems for magic, describing them as being for "monomaniacal statistics lovers." The last paragraph goes into the usual thank yous, with a final thanks given to Judges Guild, which is rather interesting.

After a brief introduction to RPGs (this book is structured to be a reference during play, I think, rather than an introduction to the game), we get into ability scores. Slightly before that is an amusing explanation of the term level. D&D has always used "level" for a variety of things - dungeon level, character level, spell level, monster level. Gary notes that he wanted to revise the terms to "rank" (replacing character level), "power" (replacing spell level), and "order" (replacing monster level). I think the the game may have evolved very differently with just that small change in terminology. We shall never know. One thing the PHB doesn't explain - how to determine your character's ability scores. The various dice rolling methods are given in the DMG. Given that the DMG wasn't available for more than a year after this book was published, I am left to wonder how folks created characters (or ran the game for that matter) if this book was their introduction to the game in 1978. One thing I noticed about ability scores - Intelligence seems to be entirely useless for non-magic-users and Wisdom seems to be entirely useless for non-Clerics. Every other score seems to have varying levels of utility for every character, including Charisma if one's campaign makes heavy use of henchmen (from what I gather from previous readings and anecdotes from older gamers, henchmen were a pretty common feature in many campaigns). Charisma also has an annoying bit of bookkeeping, at least if you're playing a dwarf or half-orc, since their Charisma penalties and racial maximums don't apply when dealing with their own kind.

Races now include dwarves, elves, gnomes, half-elves, halflings, half-orcs, and humans. Half-elves are pretty bad-ass due to their wide range of multiclassing options. Those pesky level limits are a pain though (and really low for a lot of these guys). Interestingly, dwarf, elf, and gnome clerics and halfling druids are all possible...as NPCs. I have never been a fan of NPC only classes or options. I may be a little weird though, because at my table I go by the mantra of, "If it exists in the world, you can play it...or try to, anyway."

Classes are the classic four, each of which has at least one subclass. Clerics have the druid subclass, fighters have paladins and rangers, magic-users have illusionists, and thieves have assassins. Unlike how more modern games define subclasses, these guys are more powerful versions of their core class and have ability score requirements in order to qualify for them (proto-prestige classes). We also have the oddball that doesn't fit in with the others, the monk. The "fight your way to the top" concept from OD&D is preserved here for the druid, the assassin, and the monk (though the assassin can just assassinate the next higher-up individual rather than face them head on). Assassins really seem to be designed for duet style play (one DM, one player) given the somewhat complex rules for assassinations which seem to be a solo endeavor. Dual-classing for humans is just odd. You switch entirely to your new class and can't use your old class abilities until your new class level passes the old.

Skipping ahead a bit, weapons are, in a word, complicated. First we have the Arms table in the equipment lists which has their prices. Then have the "Weight and Damage by Weapon Type" table. Each weapon does different damage based on the size of the opponent. Then we have the infamous weapon vs armor table, more accurately known as the "Weapon Types, General Data, and To Hit Adustments" table. And, if I'm reading this right, this big old table of adjustments vs various ACs only applies against opponents wearing actual armor. Eyes crossing, moving on.

Spells are even more tedious to read through than bestiaries, so we'll be jumping through the spell section a bit. Its interesting that Illusionists have their own spell list, separate from the standard magic-user and really, really odd, that they can take a handful of 1st level magic-user spells as one of their 7th spells. Didn't the Dungeon Bastard make fun of that little gem recently? Another thing that makes me a little weird compared to most gamers I know - I love spell components. I love the concept of material components and all the nifty and odd little things that end up in a magic-user's (and cleric's to a lesser extent) equipment list because of them. When DMing 1st-3.5, I always made a point of including spell components in the treasure hauls from enemy spellcasters. Remember the Brownie from the Monster Manual and how I mentioned that the little critter didn't really make it past this edition. Well, apparently a Lawful Neutral or Lawful Good magic-user could end up with one as a familiar thanks to the Find Familiar spell and a lucky d20 roll (a roll of 15, to be precise). Oh, and 100 g.p. worth of material components. Some spells suffered the same fate as the brownie, at least by my recollection. The 1st level spells Friends and Push are things I haven't seen outside of this book, except I do recall one of those Endless Quest books featuring an apprentice mage trying to cast Friends on an owlbear and dying - "Your adventure is over, start again on Page 1." Anyone know which book that was, out of idle curiosity? Another spell that faded into obscurity - Cacodemon, a 7th level spell that summons a Type IV, V, or VI demon. I wonder if this was a specific victim of the Satanism scare of the 80s? It certainly has one of the longest spell descriptions, going into a bit of detail about the ritual involved and how to control the demon once you've summoned it.

The next section is mostly advice about how to succeed at various adventures, with specific attention paid to Traps, Tricks, and Encounters. As with ability score generation, specific combat rules are not presented here, instead appearing in the DMG, unlike later editions. I'm not entirely sure what the rationale behind that was. There seems to be a genuine vibe of DM elitism at times, like the Dungeon Master was the keeper of arcane and inscrutable secrets. The section on poison is a little off-putting as well, admonishing players for considering its use and warning about game balance concerns. It seems all poison was deadly back then, so I guess that's understandable.

I think my favorite parts of this book are the Appendices.

Appendix I presents psionics. Unlike OD&D psionics, I actually managed to wrap my head around how this system is supposed to work, I think. Having psionic ability is entirely random, but I wonder how many Players begged for a reroll until they finally got a 00 (or 90 something, depending on one's Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma) on the percentile dice. The pseudo-scientific and para-psychological terminology used in this section really gives it a very different feel from the rest of the book. For some reason, the Sword & Sandals vibe comes across here more than anywhere else in the book. Maybe Dark Sun is influencing how I think about psionics, but I get a huge Conan or John Carter vibe when I read this section (side note - my only exposure to those two heroes is via movies so take that last sentence with a grain of salt).

Appendix II: Bards. The first prestige class. I wonder if anyone managed to qualify and actually play this class. I'd love to hear how that played out. The ability score requirements are rather prohibitive by themselves and you have to play for a minimum of 13 levels in fighter and thief before you can finally become a bard. One of my goals in life as a gamer is to someday play a 1st edition Bard, just to see if I can. By its very nature, unless the DM starts the campaign at high level, the presence of a bard indicates that the campaign is a long running one.

Appendix III is a weird little alignment graphic. I'm not sure what the purpose of this is.

Appendix IV touches on the planes of existence, briefly. The Great Wheel is a rectangle here.

Appendix V offers some suggestions on how to divide treasure. This has rarely been a problem with my groups as they tend to give magic items to whichever character will get the most use out of them (thus benefitting the group as a whole).

Closing Thoughts: I started with the Mentzer Basic Set "Red Box" and moved directly in to 2nd Edition, bypassing 1st Edition entirely. I first tried DMing 1E about a year ago and had mixed results. The players enjoyed it, but I found the rules to be cumbersome and awkward. That said, I'd love the chance to play this version, either as a wizard or an aspiring bard. Ah, the painful longings of a perpetual DM.

Next up: S1: Tomb of Horrors

 

[the Jester]

A guy in my campaign managed to do a 1e bard, and even got very high level in the bard class over time. The pc- I think her name was Mera- lasted until somewhere around... 8th or 9th level bard?... before finally dying due to old age.

Yep, long-running campaign, all right- and also back in the junior high/high school days, when there were hours of time for D&D almost every single day. Ahh, sigh of nostalgia.

 

[Hussar]

I remember we kind of short cut the route to bard by playing a multi class half elf fighter/thief up to the minimum requisite level and then switching over to bard. Didn't take that long if you did it that way.

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

Oh, derp, that was something I was going to mention in the review and forgot. How exactly were half-elves supposed to become bards (without doing the multi-class fudge you mentioned) if only humans can use the dual-class rules? The Bard description says you first have to progress as a fighter until 8th level, then thief for 5 levels. Half-elves can't, technically, do that.

 

[the Jester]

Oh, derp, that was something I was going to mention in the review and forgot. How exactly were half-elves supposed to become bards (without doing the multi-class fudge you mentioned) if only humans can use the dual-class rules? The Bard description says you first have to progress as a fighter until 8th level, then thief for 5 levels. Half-elves can't, technically, do that.

Half-elf bards, like druid/rangers after UA came out, required you to bend the rules.

FTR I'm pretty sure it was fighter up to 4th through 8th, then rogue until you were one level higher, then druid (which was actually bard).

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

At least Fighter 5 (but before reaching 8th) and then Thief 5 (but before reaching 10th), and then druid (but actually bard, now).