The Real Test of Back to the Basics...

[JVisgaitis]

That's right, I want to know if we're going to see the wandering prostitute table. I mean it's not really D&D without it.

There was a wandering prostitute table? I don't remember that one!

 

[Glyfair]

There was a wandering prostitute table? I don't remember that one!

Page 192 of the AD&D DMG. It was a subtable of the City/Town encounters table. Actually, it was really the random "harlot" table (the word "prostitute" was never used, but just about every non-obscene synonym or variation was).

 

[Jer]

Of course, they don't have to be random. I used to look over the random dungeon dressing tables, but I never rolled on them.

Oh I would roll on them - it's a great way to get an idea for putting something into place that I would NEVER have thought of on my own. Even looking over the chart I might not narrow in on a particular random oddity, but once I rolled it, well, it was up to me to try to be creative and see if I could get it to work.

Of course if I couldn't make it work without being boring/silly/stupid, I'd drop it and try something else. Tables are great inspiration, but there's no need to slavishly devote yourself to them...

 

[Frostmarrow]

Can I do this?

RANDOM HARLOT SUB-TABLE, 1st edition DMG
01-10 Slovenly trull
11-25 Brazen strumpet
26-35 Cheap trollop
36-50 Typical streetwalker
51-65 Saucy tart
66-75 Wanton wench
76-85 Expensive doxy
89-90 Haughty courtesan
91-92 Aged madam
93-94 Wealthy procuress
95-98 Sly pimp
99-00 Rich panderer

 

[TarionzCousin]

I mean serously, all this talk about simplifying monsters and making things easier for the GM is great and all, but what about the real tools that we used in 1st edition that never made it to 2nd and 3rd?

That's right, I want to know if we're going to see the wandering prostitute table. I mean it's not really D&D without it.

Maybe this is the new thing players will be able to spend Action Points on....

 

[Irda Ranger]

Maybe this is the new thing players will be able to spend Action Points on....

LOL.

Well played, sir.