The swinginess of low levels.

[Lanefan]

And this is relevant to the conversation how? Considering we're talking about listening at doors and the like?

The original chat was about low-level PCs choosing their encounters, and a good surprise chance certainly helps here, in that if you surprise your foe and realize things are not to your advantage there's nothing at all stopping you from fleeing as your surprise-round action - even if they chase you, you still get to pick the battle site at least to some extent.

Lanefan

 

[JRRNeiklot]

And, Lanefan, I totally agree. And if it was presented this way, I'd shut up and go away. But, it's been a couple of pages of posts now of people telling me that the problem doesn't even exist in the first place.



And this is relevant to the conversation how? Considering we're talking about listening at doors and the like?

You said:

How does the party know that there are 10 orcs in that room? They sent the thief to scout ahead with his 15% chance of move silently and 10% Hear Noise chances?

I was just pointing out that, as usual, when your knowledge of 1e is comparable to my dog's knowledge of quantum physics. Try actually reading the books before spouting off infactual information, please.

At 1st level, any party with a ranger, elf, or halfling has a reasonably good chance of gaining surprise. Surprise indicates the other party is unaware of your presence, and you may withdraw with them being none the wiser. I.E, you do the scouts job. I'd say quite a lot of parties have at least one of the above class/races, so the chance in many cases is much higher than 15%.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Well, it's not in the section about listening, which does actually list elves and halflings, and it's not under thief abilities. So, where would I find this ruling?

This is what really starts me spinning around in these conversations. If I'm wrong about the mechanics, fair enough, point me to the page and I'll go away. And, if there actually was a page to point to, typically 1e grognards would be the first to do so to rub my nose in it.

But, when you point to a page where the rules actually say something different than what people claim, suddenly it's, "There are some places - and @Hussar quoted one of them above - where the 1e DMG needs a layer of common sense applied." And it drives me nuts. Sure, you can play the card of, "Well a GOOD Dm would fix this problem" but, it doesn't change the fact that the problem exists in the first place.

We started down this road because of the claim about "smart" play where PC's would be able to control when and where encounters occur. I countered that 1st level PC's do not have the resources to do this and could actually quote chapter and verse to prove my point.

The goalposts then suddenly sprout rollerskates and leave the building. Oh, it's not that PC's don't have the resources, I'm just too incompetent of a DM to adjust the rules to make it ... what... more realistic? More believable? More of how you want to play the game? More like whatever version of D&D you think is the way it should be played?

The inherent one-true-wayism in the statements above are mind boggling. Mind boggling because I honestly don't think that people recognize what they are doing. Sure, I could change the game to suit my tastes. Yet, funnily enough, whenever that argument gets trotted out about any other edition, it's suddenly no good and doesn't work. The double standards that get applied are wonderous to see in action.

The only 'one true way' is that which your gaming group finds most appealing. The approach taken with regard to the rules will not be found on page X of any rulebook.

For me, the rules are ground level guidelines for reference when no other solution seems to work. For example the rules say there is a 15% chance to hear something. What does that mean? What level of noise is that chance supposed to represent. If there is an orchestra playing around the corner in the dungeon corridor 60 feet away do I only have a 15% chance to hear it? By those standards all adventurers are functionally deaf.

Most importantly, what does a fair assessment of the situation say? A reasonable call to make would be that everyone automatically hears the music. There isn't a rule that says so, but it makes common sense. Ignoring common sense for by the book rulings is where broken and stupid combinations come from.

The result of such nonsense is why there are so many optimizers gaming the system rather than playing the game. Its no wonder that players want to spend so much time manipulating the rules in such games. If the rules are all that matters it should come as no surprise that they want to interact with them moreso than the game world.

If the game is no more than the sum of the rules then I find it empty of the qualities that make rpgs great and different from wargames.

 

[Votan]

The problem is that - for better or worse - some editions are more difficult to change than others, and more prone to having a change to rule A knock something sideways with rule B and interact poorly with rules C and D.

1e is relatively easy to change, thus it's much likelier on finding a problem with 1e RAW the first answer you'll get from anyone is "well, just fix it". And that's not one-true-way-ism; if anything it's the opposite, as your fix to a given problem is highly likely to be different from mine because we have different tastes, different groups, and different experiences.

I think that this is absolutely correct. One of the great things about Basic D&D that was mostly replicated in AD&D is that the rules are very loose. You can change one class, set of rules, or subsystem without doing a lot else to really alter the balance in the system. The downside is that you need to track a dozen fiddly pieces and completely different sub-systems. D&D 3E and 4E made things into a more coherent system, but that made changes have ripples.

Both have some great pluses and adapt to difference styles of gaming. But I have had fun with both.

 

[nogray]

You said:

I was just pointing out that, as usual, when your knowledge of 1e is comparable to my dog's knowledge of quantum physics. Try actually reading the books before spouting off infactual information, please.

At 1st level, any party with a ranger, elf, or halfling has a reasonably good chance of gaining surprise. Surprise indicates the other party is unaware of your presence, and you may withdraw with them being none the wiser. I.E, you do the scouts job. I'd say quite a lot of parties have at least one of the above class/races, so the chance in many cases is much higher than 15%.

You said that there was a 66% chance for the right kind of scout to surprise the monsters. That is unlikely to be true, but I am always one to look for further analysis.

Let's take a typical scenario: A lone elf vs. a generic monster. While it is true that the elf surprises the monster four times out of six, he is himself surprised two time out of six, and the partial surprise segments must be accounted for, too. Also, if a door must be opened, that drops the chances to dead even. In the dark, PCs without infravision (like most rangers and halflings) must generally carry light, potentially negating their ability to effectively scout.

The monster involved also changes this considerably, as several have their own surprise modifiers. Given that you may not know what monsters are present, or even with some foreknowledge, there may be some of which you are unaware, you could find your situations somewhat reversed, with the surprise advantage slipping to neutral or to team monster. (IIRC, there is a monster that has a 90% chance to surprise in generic situations, though I could be remembering something from 2nd Edition.)

Let's look at a couple generic situations:

Key:
M#: The number of segments the monster is surprised
E#: The number of segments the elf is surprised
R#: The number of segments the ranger is surprised
NS: No net surprise segments

   monster roll  1  2  3  4  5  6                    1  2  3  4  5  6
elf roll                                  rgr roll
   1            [COLOR="Yellow"]NS[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]M1 M2 M3[/COLOR] [COLOR="Red"]E1 E1[/COLOR]             1      [COLOR="Yellow"]NS[/COLOR] [COLOR="Green"]M1 M2[/COLOR] [color="Red"]R1 R1 R1[/color]
   2            [color="Red"]E1[/color] [COLOR="Yellow"]NS[/color] [COLOR="Green"]M1 M2[/COLOR] [color="Red"]E2 E2[/color]             2      [COLOR="Green"]M1 M2 M3[/color] [COLOR="Yellow"]NS NS NS[/color]
   3            [COLOR="Green"]M1 M2 M3 M4[/color] [COLOR="Yellow"]NS NS[/color]             3      [COLOR="Green"]M1 M2 M3[/color] [COLOR="Yellow"]NS NS NS[/color]
   4            [COLOR="Green"]M1 M2 M3 M4[/color] [COLOR="Yellow"]NS NS[/color]             4      [COLOR="Green"]M1 M2 M3[/color] [COLOR="Yellow"]NS NS NS[/color]
   5            [COLOR="Green"]M1 M2 M3 M4[/color] [COLOR="Yellow"]NS NS[/color]             5      [COLOR="Green"]M1 M2 M3[/color] [COLOR="Yellow"]NS NS NS[/color]
   6            [COLOR="Green"]M1 M2 M3 M4[/color] [COLOR="Yellow"]NS NS[/color]             6      [COLOR="Green"]M1 M2 M3[/color] [COLOR="Yellow"]NS NS NS[/color]

For an elf, the monster is (net) surprised 58% of the time (21/36), the elf is surprised 14% of the time (5/36), and there is no net surprise 28% of the time (10/36). That is a bad situation (the scout or no one being surprised) 42% of the time. In order to gain even this benefit, the scout must be alone (or the whole party must be elves or whatnot). Assuming a lone scout, being essentially alone (or more than 90' in front of the party) can be a dangerous thing in a dungeon. 42% of the time, you are the only target available for the monsters to attack and do not have surprise on your side.

For a ranger, the numbers are less favorable in some ways, less penalizing in others: the monsters are surprised 47% of the time (17/36), the ranger is surprised only 8% of the time (3/36), and there is no surprise 44% of the time (16/36). Rangers can be surprised less (and only for one segment, ever), but they are at an advantage less than half of the time, and 53% of the time, they are facing the monsters as the sole target, either themselves surprised or left to the vagaries of initiative.

You also note something like "surprise means that the monsters are unaware of the party, so they can avoid the encounter if they so choose." That, however, is only one of the options for surprise. It is entirely likely that the DM chooses that the monsters are unprepared (or otherwise slow to react) instead of unaware. That means the surprising party can elect to flee or fight, but are not likely to completely avoid the monsters.

My own rubric for that would be whether or not the PC was surprised by the monsters. If the PC is surprised, the monsters noticed the scout, but were slow to react; if the monsters were the only ones to be surprised, then the PC can withdraw without notice. That puts rangers and elves able to "effectively" scout about 33% of the time. The rules have no guidance on that, though. A DM could just as easily rule that all surprise is reaction-time based, and never due to a party being unaware, or could leave it to chance (throw a d6: even, reaction time; odd, awareness). Like many other things in AD&D, the PCs ability to avoid encounters is largely left to DM fiat. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

You said that there was a 66% chance for the right kind of scout to surprise the monsters. That is unlikely to be true, but I am always one to look for further analysis.

Let's take a typical scenario: A lone elf vs. a generic monster. While it is true that the elf surprises the monster four times out of six, he is himself surprised two time out of six, and the partial surprise segments must be accounted for, too. Also, if a door must be opened, that drops the chances to dead even. In the dark, PCs without infravision (like most rangers and halflings) must generally carry light, potentially negating their ability to effectively scout.

Actually, most halflings do have infravision. All stouts, and those of mixed blood do. Only tallfellows do not.

The monster involved also changes this considerably, as several have their own surprise modifiers. Given that you may not know what monsters are present, or even with some foreknowledge, there may be some of which you are unaware, you could find your situations somewhat reversed, with the surprise advantage slipping to neutral or to team monster. (IIRC, there is a monster that has a 90% chance to surprise in generic situations, though I could be remembering something from 2nd Edition.)

Sure, that's always a possibility, nonetheless 4 in 6 is a hell of a lot better than 2 in 6.

You also note something like "surprise means that the monsters are unaware of the party, so they can avoid the encounter if they so choose." That, however, is only one of the options for surprise. It is entirely likely that the DM chooses that the monsters are unprepared (or otherwise slow to react) instead of unaware. That means the surprising party can elect to flee or fight, but are not likely to completely avoid the monsters.

You are always able to flee, if you have surprise, though. Sending a lone scout in to provoke 10 orcs and then run like hell is a good tactic. When they chase what they think is a lone elf right into a hail of missile (and spell fire) they may have to roll again for surprise, the party wont. At any rate, the chances are still much higher than the 15% postulated above. That's all I was trying to say.

Good analysis, though!