TSR Blast from the Past- How to Go Full Monty Haul in AD&D

[billd91]

...how in the nine hells did Gygax come up with the idea that these two things would stack???

It's right there in the OP. It's a pretty obvious, special Thor Wannabe power.

 

[Lanefan]

It's right there in the OP. It's a pretty obvious, special Thor Wannabe power.

Clearly that was the intent, but the mechanical design doesn't make a shred of sense.

Had either (or both) of the Gauntlets or the Girdle added to the character's strength rather than set it to a fixed value, then stacking is no problem. But when you have two items each trying to set the same element to a different fixed value, there's a clash.

Also not mentioned, of course, is how any of this interacts with other strength-altering effects e.g. Strength spell, Ray of Enfeeblement, strength drain from a Storoper, and so on. There, I think, we're left to assume that the item's set fixed-value overwrites the spell or effect; which is fine in itself but doesn't handle two things each trying to set that value to a different number.

 

[Mannahnin]

The 2,500 price for a Girdle of Giant Strength was a rather famous typo; there's a missing zero. Should be 25,000.

Yup.

 

[Azzy]

Clearly that was the intent, but the mechanical design doesn't make a shred of sense.

We're talking 1e here—there were more than a few mechanical designs that didn't make sense.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Clearly that was the intent, but the mechanical design doesn't make a shred of sense.

Had either (or both) of the Gauntlets or the Girdle added to the character's strength rather than set it to a fixed value, then stacking is no problem. But when you have two items each trying to set the same element to a different fixed value, there's a clash.

Also not mentioned, of course, is how any of this interacts with other strength-altering effects e.g. Strength spell, Ray of Enfeeblement, strength drain from a Storoper, and so on. There, I think, we're left to assume that the item's set fixed-value overwrites the spell or effect; which is fine in itself but doesn't handle two things each trying to set that value to a different number.

It's not that hard, since it's mentioned in all three items:

Gauntlets of Ogre Power:
These gauntlets are particularly desirable when combined with a girdle of giant strength and a hurled weapon.

Girdle of Giant Strength:
The strength gained is not cumulative with normal or magical strength bonuses except with regard to use in combination with gauntlets of ogre power and magic war hammers (q.v.).

Hammer of Thunderbolts:
If the wielder wears any girdle of giant strength and gauntlets of ogre power ... all girdle and gauntlets bonuses ...

In short, Gygax was saying that this was a specific recreation of Thor (and even namedrops Thor in the Hammer of Thunderbolts description). If you have Mjolnir, Jarngreipr, and Megingjoro .... then you have become Death, Destroyer of Balanced Campaigns (and Giants).

This is the only time that you get to stack bonuses- when you wield the glove, the belt, and the hammer together. Like Thor.

 

[Nikosandros]

The only thing unclear (to me) on that combo is that the description of the gauntlets and the girdles might seem to imply that their bonus would stack for any magic hammer, while I'm pretty sure that they do only do for "Thor's hammer".

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

The only thing unclear (to me) on that combo is that the description of the gauntlets and the girdles might seem to imply that their bonus would stack for any magic hammer, while I'm pretty sure that they do only do for "Thor's hammer".

It's weird... I think that Gygax liked his mysteries. Even though the DMG should only be read by DMs, it's almost like the Gauntlets entry was a "hint" of power. The girdle is a little more explicit (and uses q.v., so you're supposed to cross reference that text with the text of another rule ... aka, the hammer of thunderbolts rule) .... but the Hammer of Thunderbolts is where the explicit text is.

So all three items have indicators, but only the Hammer of Thunderbolts tells you explicitly what three items combine. You can't use it with any other magic hammers. C.f. Hammer +3, dwarven thrower.

 

[Voadam]

The only thing unclear (to me) on that combo is that the description of the gauntlets and the girdles might seem to imply that their bonus would stack for any magic hammer, while I'm pretty sure that they do only do for "Thor's hammer".

It is written ambiguously, thus 1e rules lawyer arguments to be made.

The girdle text says outright the two stack with any hammer, the gauntlets suggest it is desirable in combo with a girdle and any hurled weapon (so spears, axes, daggers, darts too) but does not state why, and of course the Hammer of Thunderbolts does not talk about other weapons.

 

[Voadam]

the "Holy Trinity" in AD&D

The hammer, gauntlets, and girdle?

In order to understand the Holy Trinity, it helps remember the Norse myth about Thor.

Yeah, your talking about the hammer, gauntlets, and girdle.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

It is written ambiguously, thus 1e rules lawyer arguments to be made.

The girdle text says outright the two stack with any hammer, the gauntlets suggest it is desirable in combo with a girdle and any hurled weapon (so spears, axes, daggers, darts too) but does not state why, and of course the Hammer of Thunderbolts does not talk about other weapons.

Not really (to the bolded part). This is something that is lost on a lot of readers today, but Gygax used q.v. in a specific context- when he used it, he meant that you were to cross reference what he just wrote with another specific rule.

So the part of the girdle text says "and magic war hammers (q.v.)." which means that you have to find the specific rules in the text for magic war hammers, which exists- but only in one place. That's why there is a "q.v." there.

Side note- q.v. is a signal (like cf.) and is Latin for quod vide, meaning "on this (matter, issue) go see" So it's a way for an author to refer to something else in the book that deals with the same subject matter, and Gygax is a big fan of it. It's also an easy way to avoid footnotes, repeating material, and, um, showing your work. Ahem.

Here's some examples of how he uses it:
DMG at 44:
Erase: This spell might be useful against a glyph of warding (q.v.).

So you look ....
DMG at 41:
Glyph Of Warding: If a cleric is on hand to determine that a glyph of warding is certainly in existence, an associated magic-user can thereafter use an erase spell and possibly (50% + 2%/level of the m-u) remove the glyph.

See!

Once you start to realize that Gygax is using this specifically for cross-referencing rules, you can't unsee it. The PHB, alone, uses it, IIRC, over 150 times.