D&D 1E Favorite Obscure Rules from TSR-era D&D

[Lanefan]

How do you reconcile that with your stance that xp=memories? That spell would cause permanent amnesia of everything that happened from the moment the PC began training for his original class to the moment the Renouncement spell is cast on him.

Selective amnesia is exactly how it works.

Then presumably, because he can't remember why he wanted to change classes, he'd start learning his old class again!

Maybe. There's nothing preventing such.

That said, the amnesia is of what you did in and as the class and what you had learned through doing so. The memories of why you wanted to do something else, or the change in ethics that led to the desire to change career*, remain.

* - the most common reason for seeking a Renouncement is a forced alignment change that either outright prevents you from being your old class or makes that class (and-or the adventuring lifestyle as a whole) no longer palatable. The second most common reason is an unforced alignment change, i.e. the character has rethought life on its own and wants to go a new direction.

 

[Alzrius]

More common here is that spellbooks get damaged or destroyed when a Mage fails a save vs AoE damage and then the book, in turn, also fails.

Less common, as in it's happened only a few times, is a Mage pulls the Deck of Many Things card that destroys all magic; as we have it that spellbooks are slightly magical*, no more spellbook.

Also less common, but I've seen it done, is other PCs intentionally vandalizing a PC Mage's spellbook, usually in an attempt to remove spells with which the Mage has - intentionally or otherwise - previously fried the party.

I'm not sure if as DM I've ever had an NPC outright steal a Mage's spellbook.

* - otherwise it'd count as a mundane possession, and there's a Deck card that whacks those too .

I always saw the issue with spellbooks as more of a cautionary tale that the player was supposed to understand than anything else. That is to say, the player was meant to be aware ahead of time that their spellbook could be treated as a weakness for them, and so they'd better be proactive in devoting some of their resources (i.e. time and money) to shoring it up.

That could include backups/traveling spellbooks, fortifying their primary spellbook with both magical and mundane reinforcements, putting traps (also mundane and/or magical) on their spellbook such as sepia snake sigil, creating spell scrolls as additional redundancies, taking the Spell Mastery feat (in 3.X), investing in a boccob's blessed book, etc.

Somewhere along the line, though, the idea that having someone target a spellbook was "going too far" became commonplace. Objections were raised regarding the feasibility of NPCs doing that (as opposed to just killing the mage) and presumed vindictiveness on the part of the GM (i.e. it was like the wizard version of making a paladin violate their oath). Eventually, it reached the point of thinking that class abilities shouldn't ever be abrogated.

Now, I want to stress that I'm absolutely in favor of keeping in mind that the point of playing an RPG is to have fun. But I'm also a proponent of the idea that setbacks, losses, and failures are part of the fun, not necessarily in the moment but overall. So the idea of "script immunity" to things like losing a spellbook doesn't sit well with me.

 

[Lanefan]

SYSTEM SHOCK!!!!

To recap, system shock rolls (part of constitution) were the percentage chance that you died when certain things happen.

Little known applications-

1. If the party magic user polymorphs you, you had to save TWICE, once when you were polymorphed, and once when you came back.

Exactly, and this very thing is what kept Polymorph Other from becoming broken: you'd only want to cast it on your enemies.

3e took out the system shock requirement, and Polymorph has been broken ever since.

2. It applied to all aging affects; that's right, in addition to haste aging you, it had a chance to KILL YOU every time it was used. This also applied when you cast wish, gate, etc.

Did it apply to the Haste spell's aging effect, by RAW? I always thought it only applied to things like Ghost touch effects.

If yes, seems odd that it didn't apply when going the other way: a Potion of Longevity that could magically make you younger carried no such roll.

DM: So, Fizwalter the Slightly Dumb, you cast wish! What do you wish for?

Player: I wish that this spell didn't age me and kill me.

Dumb player.

"I wish that whenever I cast wish, including this casting, the casting didn't cause me to age or die" would seem far more useful.

 

[Alzrius]

If yes, seems odd that it didn't apply when going the other way: a Potion of Longevity that could magically make you younger carried no such roll.

As I recall, the potion of longevity had its own obscure rule: that every time you used one (it only de-aged you by 1d12 years), you'd roll a percentage chance that was equal to the number of those potions that you'd drunk that all the age you'd displaced that way would immediately catch up to you.

 

[Staffan]

Now, I want to stress that I'm absolutely in favor of keeping in mind that the point of playing an RPG is to have fun. But I'm also a proponent of the idea that setbacks, losses, and failures are part of the fun, not necessarily in the moment but overall. So the idea of "script immunity" to things like losing a spellbook doesn't sit well with me.

I mean, there are levels of setbacks. A fighter losing their +2 longsword? That hurts. They might have to do with an axe they took off a bugbear for a while until they get the chance to get a new sword (because of course they prefer a sword due to their weapon specialization), and a new +2 sword would take even longer. That's a pretty big setback.

But a wizard losing their spellbook? Spells are the only thing that's special about a wizard, and losing your spellbook is basically code for "Well, I guess it's time to roll up a new PC." Unless of course you have one or more backups.

 

[Alzrius]

But a wizard losing their spellbook? Spells are the only thing that's special about a wizard, and losing your spellbook is basically code for "Well, I guess it's time to roll up a new PC." Unless of course you have one or more backups.

Yes, hence the parts of my post that you didn't quote.

 

[James Gasik]

.Ok, time to add another old rule to the pile. May I present, How to Subdue Your Dragon!

Talk about your complex subsystems, this takes up over half a page in the Monster Manual!

EDIT: also, the chance being higher the lower the Dragon's hit points are makes me wonder if this was the inspiration for Pokemon...

 

[Alzrius]

I remember reading this and thinking "wait, you can't subdue chromatic dragons?! Like, any of them?!" It was only after reading it in context of the platinum entry right after that which made me realize that it was referring to Tiamat (and Bahamut) specifically.

Also, I recall asking on another messageboard how long a subdued dragon stayed subdued. No one, if I remember correctly, was entirely sure.

 

[Jahydin]

Apologies if mentioned already, but I know lots of folks who miss PCs should have two Attributes Scores of 15. (pg. 9 DMG)!

 

[Shardstone]

.Ok, time to add another old rule to the pile. May I present, How to Subdue Your Dragon!

View attachment 365768
View attachment 365769
Talk about your complex subsystems, this takes up over half a page in the Monster Manual!

EDIT: also, the chance being higher the lower the Dragon's hit points are makes me wonder if this was the inspiration for Pokemon...

Legit some of my favorite rules that I wish were still in the game in some better fashioned. Being able to become a dragon rider is so sick.