Why must numbers go up?

[Fifth Element]

See, for the things that would end up being a TPK you make it VERY clear that it'd be a BAD idea to do what the party is thinking of doing. It's not hard for a DM to heavily suggest the party not try to assassinate some king in his own throne room or to attack that ancient Dragon before they actually are ready for such a challenge.

It's also not hard for a DM to simply not prepare such an encounter. My games are pretty casual, the players are all adults with real lives who play D&D to unwind, so they're not always totally into the game in a serious way. Such signals might be missed, and if they are and there's a TPK, no one has fun. Thus making the session pointless, since fun is what we want.

 

[Ariosto]

3e's main mistake on this topic, I believe, wasn't making improved weapons and other gear a necessity either. It was making that strategy a realizable one by making it so easy to fashion or otherwise buy improved magical gear. The ability to pursue that strategy made it a dominating one, even if not strictly necessary.

I sure like to play clerics and magic-users in TSR-D&D, but WotC just went bonkers over the spell-casting classes! The deal of turning magic items into stuff to pick from a Sears & Roebuck catalog, instead of treasures acquired in perilous quests, was certainly part of that.

The mundane-izing of magic went (from what I saw) beyond its becoming trivially common due to low-level characters having cut and dried -- and not very costly -- means of turning out widgets.

Just what those widgets were and did became, in my experience, limited to lists in store-bought books.

In old D&D, I am accustomed to spell-casters devising incantations of their own well before they are able even to scribe scrolls. By the time they are of such eminence as to undertake the enchantment of rings and swords, wands and cups -- each such case itself an adventure into the unknown -- they often have in mind again magics peculiar to themselves.

The investment and risk involved not only bode against a great surplus of magic, but make it more likely that the production -- often even the acquisition -- of such artifacts will be directed toward the attainment of particular ends. They are likely to play dramatic roles in whatever events give rise to, and stem from, the pursuit of such powers.

By mid-level to high level, 1 HD creatures needed 20's to hit everyone [in 1E] ...

YMMV, of course. Magic-users and thieves tend not to be so hard to hit, IME. Those in G1-3 Against the Giants were normally AC 2 (hit 20%). An orc chief's body guards fight as if 3 HD, not needing a basic 20 versus less than AC -4.

The bottom line is that each point of damage to a PC is a point closer to using up the party's resources. Sometimes, delay alone uses up precious time.

Still and all, yes -- when you've got an AC of -1 or better, you are some kind of awesome regardless of your other attributes. If that's due to magic, then it might take a few dice of hit points to hold it versus them as are inclined to kill you and take your stuff.

We had a mob attack houserule which helped, and that was swaying my thinking wrt Orcs!

The procedures in the 1E DMG are more complicated than that in the 0E FAQ, but overbearing and grappling can be good ways to bring numbers to bear -- especially versus a heavily (or magically) armored foe.

Also note that, per the 1E PHB, ordinary orcs -- having a full 8-sided hit die -- are not subject to any more than a fighter's usual number of attacks per round (as opposed to one per experience level versus 0-level men, goblins, etc.).

 

[MerricB]

You're right of course. We had a mob attack houserule which helped, and that was swaying my thinking wrt Orcs!

It's worth noting that in the old D&D articles, Gary discussed the Orcs swarming and overbearing the opponents. Due to the way the rules were written then, Level didn't mean that much - so a group of orcs using (ahem) weaponless fighting styles could be quite dangerous.

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

I sure like to play clerics and magic-users in TSR-D&D, but WotC just went bonkers over the spell-casting classes! The deal of turning magic items into stuff to pick from a Sears & Roebuck catalog, instead of treasures acquired in perilous quests, was certainly part of that.

Thanks for reminding me I need to send out an e-mail to my players, telling them they can't just buy - or craft - anything they want. They'll need to research it first!

Cheers!

 

[Umbran]

What about if they break out of a dungeon at some point and then at a later point decide they need to break into the same dungeon again for whatever reason, say 10 levels later. Why is it suddenly all the guards and such in the dungeon are suddenly 10 levels higher?

Well, you don't give me enough information to give a good answer. The devil is in the details. There's any number of ways to tailor the thing to their needs...

The party is 10 levels higher, sure. But how much time has gone by? 1 year? 10 years? Time has passed for the PCs, and they've changed a great deal. They'd be rather daft to think the dungeon somehow stayed exactly the same over the same period of time. The dungeon too, may change. If it is a short time, it may change in reaction to their previous incursion. If it is a long time, there may well have been other events there that brought about change - someone new moved in and took charge, for example.

Or, I might just leave the regions they'd already explored the same - they'd wipe through it quickly, and then beyond the areas they'd previously explored, they'd find the level-appropriate stuff. Or, I might well offer them a hint of a way to bypass the stuff they'd done before, and get to the things that are an actual challenge to them.

but if you're talking about going into a city or something else that's far more static of an environment

Cities are static?

I left the town I grew up in years ago, went to college, then grad school. I didn't spend any significant time in my home town for years. Then, my parents decided to move, and gave me orders to come get all the crap I'd left behind and haul it away. Sure, many of the buildings were the same, but over the course of the years, most of the people had changed - some died, others moved away, others had kids, others moved in. It really wasn't the same place I grew up. I deny that cities (or towns, or rural hamlets, or anyplace) needs to be particularly static.

Now, having said all that, having a game be "tailored" does not, at least to me, mean that every single thing you meet is part of an encounter that is, say, of a Challenge Rating equal to the average party level. That's not how tailoring works. You can still have cakewalks and things so hard they'll kill everyone - tailoring (to me) means that you pick which is which, is all.

 

[Ariosto]

It's also not hard for a DM to simply not prepare such an encounter.

Different strokes for different folks.

People who enjoy more strategic games are also "adults with real lives who play D&D to unwind".

 

[AllisterH]

Change only exists if your options grow; if you can do new things and different things.

If you keep doing the same thing, using the same options and tactics, but just with different numbers, well, then the change amounts to something like playing croquet with the green mallet instead of the blue one...

Er, by that argument, you do realize you're arguing that none of the melee classes in D&D pre 4e actually "change" right?

Personally, I'm not sure that's true since there is a fundamental difference in play and feel IMO that while a 1st level fighter fears magic since he pretty much will autofail effects, a 20th level fighter simply can laugh in the face of magic thanks to the "linear" increase in the chances of said fighter resisting magic.

I wonder though why the spell using classes got both "linear" expansion (i.e. fireball gets bigger and bigger as you level) and "non-linear" expansion (i.e. high level spells allow spellcasters to do things they could NEVER do at low level)

 

[Enclave]

It's also not hard for a DM to simply not prepare such an encounter. My games are pretty casual, the players are all adults with real lives who play D&D to unwind, so they're not always totally into the game in a serious way. Such signals might be missed, and if they are and there's a TPK, no one has fun. Thus making the session pointless, since fun is what we want.

Well, you're clearly not being blatant enough. When I say it's not hard for a DM to inform the players that it'd be a BAD idea, I mean flat out saying "Guys, you may want to rethink that plan"

I'm not talking about subtle hints, I'm talking about the sublty of a sledge hammer.

edit:

I should note, my friends and myself are in the late 20's to early 30's age range, so don't act like you're the only adult playing to unwind.

Cities are static?

Pardon me if I don't quote everything, I'm not in the mood to do a lot of typing right now.

Anyways, yes, cities are static in the sense that your average guards will not suddenly be so much more powerful than they were say 10 years ago. They're going to be pretty run of the mill. If a bunch of town guards or the like suddenly became just as strong as you, why exactly do people in towns need you when they could just send the guards to deal with the BBEG or whatever your campaign has.

So yes, cities are static in this way. Sure they change a lot, but you cannot expect the levels of strength of the average guards and the like to have improved all that much at all. The main changes I could see in a city would be if some new guild has moved into town or the guards have a new captain who's quite strong. But these are more isolated things. The average town guard is still going to be your average town guard. You're not going to have a town full of Paragon or Epic level town guards, that's just ridiculous to even think such a thing.

 

[Wiseblood]

It seems to me that some posters here are commenting a different thread. Is advancement good.

I thought it was about.

Why do we roll d20 and add +17,+2,+1 to compare it to 33
instead of rolling a d20 and adding nothing and comparing it to 13?

(adding nothing is a bit harsh but sureley it doesn't need to exceed +10)

A lot of bonuses especially in 4e are artificial and could be more effectively and elegantly expressed as something other than a +X to hit.(and damage)

 

[Ariosto]

With the "tailored" city environment, I figure the key is

You can still have cakewalks and things so hard they'll kill everyone - tailoring (to me) means that you pick which is which, is all.

Note that (unless I am misinterpreting) it's the GM doing the picking. The GM has, if not a sketch (or more) of a plot line in several acts, then at least some gauge of the dramatic significance of a situation.

NPC Militia vs. NPC Space Invaders goes whichever way the GM wants it. If the PCs join the Invaders in sacking the city, then maybe they will mop up the Militia mooks -- only to find that partisans Abigail "Ma" Hunckle, Herbie Popnecker and Irving Forbush are tough nuts to crack. Those worthies, on the other hand, will be of little direct help (probably occupied elsewhere) if the PCs go against the aliens -- who of course muster against them champions just tough enough to get Our Heroes warmed up for the prize match with their boss Doh.

So, what really matters most is not a figure's imaginary role in the world (although that may matter quite a bit), but its role in whatever "the adventure" at hand happens to be.

Sometimes "the adventure" might just be a series of combat games bolted together with MacGuffins. Sometimes it might be the unfolding of a "detective" story in which the mystery's solution (though not the particular means) is guaranteed, in time to play out the confrontation bound to follow the revelation. Sometimes it might be an exploration of themes driving toward character-defining moments.

Whatever form it takes, there is some sense of where "the adventure" lies, and of what sorts of things are appropriate to it.

In old D&D, one reason for having a lot of distinct variations on basically the same kind of monster (e.g., the "humanoids" ranging from Kobolds to Ogres) is to give players information they can use in assessing risks. It's sort of like being able to tell apart models of tank or plane in a World War 2 game.

If it's harder to tell what is what, then that can add challenge to game that's significantly about reconnaissance and planning.

The flip side is that it can have a synergy in a game that's more about the GM setting up a balanced scenario. Not only are the players more dependent on the GM's judgment, but it might not be so obvious -- even after the fact -- when something is "not really all that".

Presumably, the players who chose to play such a game in the first place are not going out of their way to snoop "behind the curtain". However the dance goes, they accept that it's the GM's job to lead -- and trust that they won't get led into something they can't handle.

That's not so much my cup of tea, especially for something billed as "D&D", but a lot of people seem to prefer it.