D&D General "For 4 to 6 characters of 6th to 9th level" - Notes on the intro to a Dungeon adventure

[aco175]

Add in level caps for non-humans and the party a member that is capped at 7th level and the rest going higher.

Also, there was the intend to bringing characters from one game to the next and playing in different groups. If I bring my 8th level Pc to the game and everyone is 6th- it can still work. There was some widely ranging styles back in the Wild West of gaming.

Don't forget about henchmen and hirelings that can swing all sorts of things. I do not recall if they counted towards the level of the dungeon. Read some of the old Gygax articles about players not wanting to bring certain characters in certain parts of Castle Greyhawk until the lower level henchmen cleared out some of the traps and such.

 

[Sacrosanct]

As mentioned, the biggest reasons you saw that were:

• different XP tables meant different level advancement rates by class
• multi-classing was much different, as you split your XP (dual classing was even wonkier)
• level caps
• the power range between a level 3 fighter and level 5 fighter was much closer than in 3e or beyond, so having different level classes worked smoother than in modern editions.

 

[jayoungr]

At leas in my experience, players had binders of characters that they have played over the years. When they sit down for a module, they go through their characters and figure out what to play. I may pull out my 5th level dwarf, Dorbo for one game, whereas another night, it may be my 2nd level magic-user.

People don't still do that?

 

[Ancalagon]

The thing that stands out most to me is that it implies that the characters might not all be the same level.

Back in the early 90s, we were still playing BECM....and it wasn't uncommon for there to be different characters of different levels in the party.

Exactly. There were several factors causing this:

1: different classes had different XP requirement. The thief was kinda weak, but their XP requirements were low enough that they were normally the highest level PC (... if they hadn't died)

2: Death was more common, and a new PC either started at level 1 (ouch!) or at the lowest level in the party.

3: Level draining effects were a lot more common, and dreaded by the PCs/players.

4: Multiclassing was.. different... and a mutli-class character would usually be about a level lower.

So as a result you could have bob the lucky thief at level 7, Jane the average fighter at level 6, Mike the fighter/mage at level 5/5, Luke the ranger who got level drained to level 5 and Lucy the cleric who's previous PC died and is back and is starting at level 5 (to match Luke)

 

[Lyxen]

People don't still do that?

I have fond memories of doing this, but now, at our tables, we only play long campaigns, so we don't have a character folder with characters of various levels in there.

But yes, when I was playing in a club, it was great to see who would play at which table during in the evening, what the levels would be, and who would the players bring, because the characters would then act as old friends and reminisce about shared adventures in the past. Nostalgia.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

What strikes me is 1991 is quite late for the author to consider a non-financial reward to be a novel idea. We had already had Dragonlance at that point.

 

[Hussar]

multi-classing was much different, as you split your XP (dual classing was even wonkier)

There was also the additional point of how do you calculate the level of a multi-classed character? If you are a 6th Fighter/7th/MU/8th Thief (which is entirely possible dividing your xp three ways because the xp tables in older D&D were wonky as all get out), what level character is that? IIRC, you counted the highest level first, and then half for each other class, but, it's been a really long time.

But, yeah, the range is not terribly shocking. There were MASSIVE differences between the capabilities of characters between tables. Heck, if you had the base 3 fighter types, cleric, wizard and thief, and your three fighter types all had percentile strength, by 6th or 7th level, you could be dealing well over a hundred points of damage in a single round in 2e just with attacks. In a game where trolls averaged what, 30, 40 HP? It really could get out of hand.

 

[Lyxen]

What strikes me is 1991 is quite late for the author to consider a non-financial reward to be a novel idea. We had already had Dragonlance at that point.

Honestly, Dragonlance is a very mixed bag for me. It was still extremely classical in design. The illustrations were fantastic, but the novels were really not that good, and honestly, the module design was really bad. The first dungeon is full of uninteresting encounters that repeat themselves and the fight against the dragon is totally stupid at that level.

 

[Stormonu]

As someone who got an adventure published in Dungeon, the level range was common, but it was a guess (based on experience). You didn't calculate a budget of any sort for the adventure, it was purely by feel.

The author's comments on party composition weren't atypical for these things, but were opinion-based based on their own gaming. The Dungeon staff did prefer to go for adventures that were in some way "out of the ordinary" and not something they felt any old DM could whip up. It had to have an element that stood out in some way, so its not your typical gaming fare.

I learned a lot of this from a seminar TSR held back in the 90's, where the staff lectured us in detail in the sort of things they were looking for publication. They had us go through exercises to brainstorm content, as the seminar was created in the hopes of grooming future authors for creating content for TSR. It was there I came up with the idea for what would be "The Winter Tapestry" - and I met Owen K.C. Stephens as he was being brought aboard TSR.

 

[el-remmen]

As someone who got an adventure published in Dungeon

Issue and adventure title, please. .?