Quote from: Eric Diaz on June 04, 2023, 04:15:43 PM
Now, we get something useful. PCs are defined by their class "virtually to the exclusion of all other activities", but might have some past experience determined randomly. This is nice as it replaces many skills and backgrounds in modern games. It can be ported directly to B/X, and a similar system is used in modern games such as Shadow of the Demon Lord and my own Dark Fantasy Basic (both with a bit more specific advice on how to use these backgrounds mechanically). Just roll 1d100 and check the table below:


    When secondary skills are used, it is up to the DM to create and/or
    adjudicate situations in which these skills are used or useful to the player
    character. As a general rule, having a skill will give the character the ability
    to determine the general worth and soundness of an item, the ability to find
    food, make small repairs, or actually construct (crude) items. For example, an
    individual with armorer skill could tell the quality of normal armor, repair
    chain links, or perhaps fashion certain weapons.

This is one of those ideas Gary boldly returned to with Lejendary Adventure. It's a skill-based RPG, but the skills work a lot like these secondary skills. Using insight from LA, I was able to put together some notes detailing a little more what each of the Secondary Skills do.

Quote from: My Secret Notes
Armorer, Bowyer/Fletcher, Leather Worker/Tanner, and Tailor/Weaver. These will mainly only ever be used during down-time. Although they may be used in-game to conduct repairs on metal armor, bows/crossbows, leather armor, and padded armor respectively. Secondary skill in one of these areas may also enable the character to evaluate the quality of items within their skill area. I would also consider possibly replacing Bowyer/Fletcher on the list with "Weaponer" divided up into three types indicated on the top of the second column of pg 34.

Farmer/Gardener, apart from use during "down time", this secondary skill may allow the character to identify herbs and know its reputed uses and effects. The character will also have knowledge of customs and mannerisms of rustic, rural, and farming communities.

Fisher (netting), Forester, Hunter/Fisher, these will allow the character to find fresh food in cases where rations are running low. As a rule of thumb, one day of dedicated activity can yield food for one person for 1 week on average. Though I would consider hunting game animals would give the character a 2 in 6 chance per day of obtaining enough meat to feed 1 man for 20 days. Foresters may also identify safe to eat fruits and berries as well as assess terrain for safely crossing through wilderness areas.

Gamblers will have knowledge of games, probability and odds, and also skilled at (and at discovering) cheating. This may also give the character the ability to evaluate man, animal, or vessel for the purposes of determining who will most likely win a race or contest.

Husbandman involves caring for riding and draft animals and livestock. Mainly this will be applicable in downtime, however a character with this skill may be able to evaluate the quality of a horse, or effectively befriend and train animals such as dogs.

Jeweler/lapidary, can be used to evaluate the value of gems/jewels, and possibly improve gems, mainly during downtime.

Mason/Carpenter, Shipwright, Woodworker/cabinetmaker. Building structures during down time, certainly, but possibly even creating makeshift shelters in survival situations. They would also be able to evaluate the quality of workmanship, condition, and integrity of a structure. Carpenters and woodworkers may also be able to create and repair wooden shields.

Miner, during downtime performing or directing excavation and prospecting activities. During play, they may be able to evaluate the structural integrity of a mining tunnel. You may also want to allow them to perform some of the special abilities normally reserved for dwarves and/or gnomes.

Navigator, Sailor. In order to engage in any sort of waterfaring, a certain minimum number of crew members must be skilled in this area. The number needed will vary by vessel. NPC sailors should be assumed to have the sailing skill with at least 1 or 2 crew members being skilled navigators.

Teamster/freighter are skilled in operation of overland vessels, control and care for draft animals, evaluation of overland vessels and minor repair may also be possible. Some teamsters may also be specialized in erecting certain equipment, such as roustabouts for a circus.

Trader/Barterer. Ability to evaluate the quality of goods and estimate market value. Skill at negotiation and commerce. Literacy and numeracy should be assumed for most characters with this skill.

Trapper/Furrier, ability to set traps, mainly animal traps, including knowing the best places to set traps to capture animals. Furriers know how to skin an animal to preserve its pelt, how to treat and create it into valuable furs for trade and use in making garments.

I found this works really well with Castles & Crusades. I nix the priming of attributes, instead the "primes" are pinned to one of the Secondary Skills. The diverse activity covered by skills might actually use different attributes, but having the skill primed means using the lower TN. So this makes the priming a lot less redundant with the attributes.

One side note. I made a brief mention once of "Forester" on Dragonsfoot, and the ignorance there was palpable. "Use more precise language" one mentally obese fuck demanded. It's like, yo, don't you read the goddamn book? Forester is one of the secondary skills.

One of the things I really appreciated about Gary's writing and this book in particular when I was a kid learning this game, is that Gary doesn't speak down to you. The downside that comes with that, though, is sometimes you're expected to know stuff that isn't obvious. Like Forester was an actual medieval profession. It's a precise term. Not just "hey, this guy wears green tights."

During times of war, some of the activities of the Forester expanded, and those expanded activities are an astonishing match for the very first line of the Ranger class description in the PHB "Rangers are a sub-class of fighter who are adept at woodcraft, tracking, scouting, and infiltration and spying." And so it seems like the intent is that the Ranger is an elite Forester. As such, unless you have a specific reason to do otherwise, I would assume that all rangers have the Forester secondary skill. Meaning they've got wilderness skills beyond just what's in the class description. Oh, and the very last word of that sentence I quoted? Spying? There's no mention of the Ranger in the DMG section on Spying, but I definitely wonder if Rangers should get to use the Assassin Spying Table as well. At least for spy activity that borders on scouting and recon.

QuoteCHARACTER AGE, AGING, DISEASE, AND DEATH
This section has several detailed tables on starting age, aging, disease, death and resurrection. As such, they can be used in B/X as written. While I'm not particularly interested in checking monthly to see if the PCs suffer from parasites or mild ear disease, I can see the point if you're running a particularly extended and realistic campaign. But fun trumps realism, remember? Which is why we don't get realistic combat or even critical hits (IIRC). Instead, we have urinary system infection.

Sorry, gotta say this is a run-of-the-mill/cliched/mediocre take on this. I can get this identical commentary on this section out of every 1E-hating 2E gamer who's never read a 1E book in their life.

I use the monthly disease checks. Part of the reason is just to drop the bomb up front. Your PCs are all going to die. Period. The question we're putting to the game is, what great things can you do in the meantime. Yeah. It's kind of the influence of Braveheart creeping in again. Every PC dies. Not every PC truly lives. So contrary to the view that disease tables is just getting bogged down in realism, and that it's work not fun, I think at least the way I present it sets the tone for ramping up the fun of the game. Especially if you have really cautious, risk-averse players at the table.

There is a secondary reason. It's more of a practical one than a tone-setting one. It's game economics. Not to be confused with the economics of the in-game setting. It's a cost to sitting still. Face it, before the first round of disease checks even come, there's a good chance the PCs can afford to pay for a Cure Disease. Sure. Sometimes the dice might turn up something interesting, and that alone could be a good reason to use these tables. But mostly it's just going to drain the PCs money. May even force them to sell a magic-item. I like having magic-items come and go. You know why? Because I can ramp up the frequency with which players get to experience the excitement of their character gaining a new magic item, but without the PCs becoming so inundated with magic items that they no longer value them. I can have my cake and eat it, too.

My tertiary reason is it's also part of time-keeping in the campaign. We rarely miss a combat round, and it's because we have plenty of procedural stuff to do, like rolling initiative. Well, if there's something to roll on a monthly basis, I'm more likely to remember to do it. And, of course, nail the PCs with that monthly cost of living.

Regarding WvAC, Appreciate the extensive analysis of the various methodology of the topic.

Quote from: Lunamancer on June 10, 2023, 10:49:56 PM
... Anyway, I got one more for you. Method 5. This involves using THAC0 and working off of calculation rather than referencing the attack matrix. The very last paragraph of DMG pg 73, with its instructions on how to deal with ACs not on the table, set the precedent that determining hits by calculation/formula/pattern rather than using the table. So using THAC0 calculations is perfectly fine BtB...

I quite like this method you posted.  I'm going to give that one a go.  It's compact, succinct, and useful for running the calculations without referencing the tables all the time.

While researching this, I see many others like my young self, chucked these rules (and others) back in the day for one reason or another, which I now think is a shame.  Forget everyone using daggers with Holmes, now let's all use longswords with AD&D!  One would think the severely crippling the 2-handed sword in Moldvay would have been enough incentive to reconsider one's stance.

Perhaps a case of the player base shifting from OD&D players, with previous knowledge aiding them in grokking Gygax's approach, to the new wave of Basic players coming in, with pre-conceived notions and kind of bouncing off some of the concepts presented.

However, if one looks at the Rogues Gallery, they'll see 'base' AC/WvAC was alive and well, evidently used by the staff at TSR, as their own characters were depicted.  Even Gygax's great Mordenkainen was bopping around with an AC 10 on his sheet.  Granted, he had bracers of defence and other means to assist protection, but it was evidently a distinction made with a purpose.

As Wells, the game mechanic 'answer person' in Dragon was involved in making this, I figure she makes a pretty good candidate for credibility of how things were run (curiously, a few evil characters played by the staff/associates as well, certainly putting an interesting spin on the perceived style of game being played using 1e).

Quote from: Lunamancer on June 11, 2023, 12:18:22 AM
...One side note. I made a brief mention once of "Forester" on Dragonsfoot, and the ignorance there was palpable. "Use more precise language" one mentally obese fuck demanded. It's like, yo, don't you read the goddamn book? Forester is one of the secondary skills.

One of the things I really appreciated about Gary's writing and this book in particular when I was a kid learning this game, is that Gary doesn't speak down to you. The downside that comes with that, though, is sometimes you're expected to know stuff that isn't obvious. Like Forester was an actual medieval profession. It's a precise term. Not just "hey, this guy wears green tights."...

Hilarious.  Yea, some forums have tended to produce a 'my way or the highway' predilection with some of the more debatable topics, assuming that anyone coming in just doesn't grok things.  The clique atmosphere mind-set that develops sometimes is unfortunate.

Honestly, I think half the lexicon I use came from reading the AD&D books.  I've got kids and you can make darn sure I'm going to encourage them to read them, if for nothing more than expanding their vocabulary.

The meagre pre-adventuring skills column is something that I pretty much remember glossing over, but it could have some real benefits for distinguishing the characteristics and makeup of a character, if not directly tied to mechanics.  Although, if one is using UA with the armour denting rules, or finds that obscure rule in the DMG about bows being custom crafted for strength bonuses, I probably would have been much more inclined to take notice.  Even having the simple background of a sailor is going to be useful when you're the only one that knows for sure they can sink or swim when the day comes.


This has been a very helpful discussion to grok things.  I look forward to reading more of your blog Eric Diaz as you continue, seeing others input their knowledge in the spirit of healthy advice and insights.  A more thorough read of the AD&D books has changed quite a few things I erroneously perceived, for the better.

<edit sp>

Quote from: Lunamancer on June 10, 2023, 10:49:56 PM
And by the way, before anyone jumps the gun and says this is just confusion, or poor editing, or chaos at TSR during the time the DMG was published, or that there's some mathematical error, I'm going to point out that something somewhat similar comes up again in Gary Gygax's Lejendary Adventure, where there is little consistency as to whether a bonus is subtracted from the die roll or added to the target number (this is a percentile roll-under system). If you get into the weeds of the system, though, there are subtle differences in effect. Just like with what you're seeing with how the number needed to hit varies depending which method you use. So I think it's an intentional feature of the design. It's the task of the advanced Game Master to simply understand the differences in effect and simply go with the one that seems most reasonable to the GMs sensibilities or the GMs world.

Your entire post on THAC0 is interesting food for thought. After I'm finished with AD&D, might try LA.

The part we disagree, I think, might be a matter of perspective. I do not think "little consistency" is a plus in game design; while your analysis does help one to understand the DMG, I think such explanations should be in the book (if intentional).

Quote from: Lunamancer on June 10, 2023, 10:49:56 PM
We always interpreted 2H swords having a harder time hitting someone in no armor is it was something of a bonus to acknowledge the exceptionally free movement of someone running around in their skivvies. When I started using these adjustments in the mid-90's, a lot of RPGs were big on imposing penalties for using armor. I never liked the idea. I think something that was designed to be effective protection in combat should not make you a sitting duck. That didn't make sense to me. But one single instance against a particularly slow weapon (highest weapon speed of all non-pole weapons) is a way of acknowledging that there is some performance loss in using armor without overturning the utility of leather armor. I thought it was fair and reasonable and made enough sense.

As for drop your shield when you see a footman's flail, that is literally something we said and were aware of. And I think that is usable information, but for the fact that I don't recall there ever being an instance of someone running around with a shield but no armor. If such a thing ever did happen, then we'd need them to run into someone who was swinging a footman's flail or mace. It's like that time in August 1965 when for about an hour George Carlin was both fine and dandy at the same time, but no one asked him how he was feeling.

Again, interesting, but to me it sounds like justification - not something intentional. Somewhat similar to B/X fans (I'm one) insisting that the price of garlic (1/12th of plate armor) is justifiable for some reason, or that in their settings garlic is a rare commodity, etc. Instead of justifying it, I prefer just fixing it (should cost 5 cp probably).

Likewise, I do not think wearing no armor would leave you better of against a 2H sword. Same with shields. Might be rare, might have a reasonable explanation, etc., but it just doesn't seem to improve the game.

(With that said, I must say discussing with you has given me a more nuanced view on the subject and helped me see the usefulness of starting with AD&D numbers when creating my own).

About armor penalties, I agree - in fact, I do think D&D has a steep speed penalty to use armor - and the weapon versus armor table is useful to make heavy armor even more important.

Quote from: Lunamancer on June 11, 2023, 12:18:22 AM

This is one of those ideas Gary boldly returned to with Lejendary Adventure. It's a skill-based RPG, but the skills work a lot like these secondary skills. Using insight from LA, I was able to put together some notes detailing a little more what each of the Secondary Skills do.

[...]

I found this works really well with Castles & Crusades. I nix the priming of attributes, instead the "primes" are pinned to one of the Secondary Skills. The diverse activity covered by skills might actually use different attributes, but having the skill primed means using the lower TN. So this makes the priming a lot less redundant with the attributes.

Great stuff! I like your use with Castles and Crusades - it is very similar to something I did in my own RPG (e.g., a background just gives you an advantage when attempting some checks).

Quote from: Lunamancer on June 11, 2023, 12:18:22 AM
One of the things I really appreciated about Gary's writing and this book in particular when I was a kid learning this game, is that Gary doesn't speak down to you. The downside that comes with that, though, is sometimes you're expected to know stuff that isn't obvious. Like Forester was an actual medieval profession. It's a precise term. Not just "hey, this guy wears green tights."

During times of war, some of the activities of the Forester expanded, and those expanded activities are an astonishing match for the very first line of the Ranger class description in the PHB "Rangers are a sub-class of fighter who are adept at woodcraft, tracking, scouting, and infiltration and spying." And so it seems like the intent is that the Ranger is an elite Forester. As such, unless you have a specific reason to do otherwise, I would assume that all rangers have the Forester secondary skill. Meaning they've got wilderness skills beyond just what's in the class description. Oh, and the very last word of that sentence I quoted? Spying? There's no mention of the Ranger in the DMG section on Spying, but I definitely wonder if Rangers should get to use the Assassin Spying Table as well. At least for spy activity that borders on scouting and recon.

I agree there's a downside to this. I would prefer things to be much clearer. "Forester" is clear enough. "You could resolve an attack in any of four or five ways" is not, and should be explicit.

Agree about the ranger too. To me, a ranger is just a fighter with some wilderness skills.

Quote from: Lunamancer on June 11, 2023, 12:18:22 AM
Sorry, gotta say this is a run-of-the-mill/cliched/mediocre take on this. I can get this identical commentary on this section out of every 1E-hating 2E gamer who's never read a 1E book in their life.

I use the monthly disease checks. Part of the reason is just to drop the bomb up front. Your PCs are all going to die. Period. The question we're putting to the game is, what great things can you do in the meantime. Yeah. It's kind of the influence of Braveheart creeping in again. Every PC dies. Not every PC truly lives. So contrary to the view that disease tables is just getting bogged down in realism, and that it's work not fun, I think at least the way I present it sets the tone for ramping up the fun of the game. Especially if you have really cautious, risk-averse players at the table.

There is a secondary reason. It's more of a practical one than a tone-setting one. It's game economics. Not to be confused with the economics of the in-game setting. It's a cost to sitting still. Face it, before the first round of disease checks even come, there's a good chance the PCs can afford to pay for a Cure Disease. Sure. Sometimes the dice might turn up something interesting, and that alone could be a good reason to use these tables. But mostly it's just going to drain the PCs money. May even force them to sell a magic-item. I like having magic-items come and go. You know why? Because I can ramp up the frequency with which players get to experience the excitement of their character gaining a new magic item, but without the PCs becoming so inundated with magic items that they no longer value them. I can have my cake and eat it, too.

My tertiary reason is it's also part of time-keeping in the campaign. We rarely miss a combat round, and it's because we have plenty of procedural stuff to do, like rolling initiative. Well, if there's something to roll on a monthly basis, I'm more likely to remember to do it. And, of course, nail the PCs with that monthly cost of living.

I don't claim to be an expert on AD&D (although I am far from an "1e hater"); I'm just checking the book to see what I can use. I can see the value of disease checks in a realistic campaign, but I do not find it particularly fun. It could work, I might even use something similar - maybe as part of a bigger table of nefarious events.

About time keeping... I think we will end up agreeing on this one. It is my favorite section of the book so far, it might completely change the way I run campaigns. Same for spell acquisition.

Quote from: rocksfalleverybodydies on June 11, 2023, 04:49:07 AM
This has been a very helpful discussion to grok things.  I look forward to reading more of your blog Eric Diaz as you continue, seeing others input their knowledge in the spirit of healthy advice and insights.  A more thorough read of the AD&D books has changed quite a few things I erroneously perceived, for the better.

Thank you! I'm really enjoying this discussion too.

I've been learning a lot from the book and from this forum.

First, I've made an index for the series so you can read all parts.

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2023/06/dmg-1e-cover-to-cover-index.html

Here is part IV, my favorite so far.

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2023/06/ad-dmg-cover-to-cover-part-iv-pages-37.html

TIME

So, I went "digging" into the DMG... and now I think I've found some gold. This single page made me want to completely change the way I run games. It might be the most interesting part so far.

Of course this is not the first time I've read this. This part contains a famous quote in all caps. In addition, many people have been talking about this lately most notably Jeffro Johnson. Here is a relevant bit:

    Game time is of utmost importance. Failure to keep careful track of time expenditure by player characters will result in many anomalies in the game. The stricture of time is what makes recovery of hit points meaningful. Likewise, the time spent adventuring in wilderness areas removes concerned characters from their bases of operation — be they rented chambers or battlemented strongholds. Certainly the most important time stricture pertains to the manufacture of magic items, for during the period of such activity no
    adventuring can be done. Time is also considered in gaining levels and learning new languages and more. All of these demands upon game time force choices upon player characters, and likewise number their days of game life.
    One of the things stressed in the original game of D&D was the importance of recording game time with respect to each and every player character in a campaign. In AD&D it is emphasized even more: YOU CAN NOT HAVE A MEANINGFUL CAMPAIGN IF STRICT TIME RECORDS ARE NOT KEPT.

The gist of this section is emphasizing how important time keeping is for your campaign. This includes not only turns and rounds but also days, weeks and months. The book also stresses the importance of downtime and rotating characters. For example, when a PC is hurt, diseased, or busy with an important project (e.g., researching spells or creating a magic item), you should go adventuring without him or her - or maybe using an entire different party. Even better, you can have multiple groups of players, and different parties, as hinted before.

The method Gygax used for that is "real time": If one week has passed in the real world, one week has passed in the game world. This means a player could be using a different character for months. Of course you will occasionally need to freeze time between sessions, but now the clock is not working only at the players (in their characters) convenience. Time-railroading is limited. This gives the campaign a much more satisfying, organic feel.

For smaller units of time, the book recommends careful note keeping. I'm not a big fan of this, but you can easily be replaced by real time too, as I suggested here and apparently has become popular in other games lately.

Time seems to be the glue that holds many rules together: Healing, researching, building, random encounters, searching, torches, diseases, etc. Once you ignore it, everything seems to come crashing down. Maybe this is one of the fundamental ideas of old school play.

There is much to ponder about this section. For now, I'll just recommend that you read it yourself, in its entirety. This is the first time in this series that I do that.

CHARACTER SPELLS (plus ACQUISITION)

After finishing this important section on time I thought I could glance over the section on spells. However, there's important stuff here too.

The first parts of this section are about spell acquisition.  I always disliked the idea  that clerics get ALL spells "for free". Here, the book makes clear that this requires continued service in favor of a deity - and, for higher level spells, direct communication with their gods! An "unfaithful" cleric must perform sacrifice and atonement to get spells (which may require time), but changing deities might have irreversible consequences (including instant death, which is less interesting). Similar rules apply to paladins.

Starting magic-users get additional spells and scrolls when compared to B/X,  but here it is clear that these spells are random. The book provides a small table that ensures they'll be varied enough:


Illusionists follow a similar pattern. Some spell choice is permitted on "difficult campaigns".

As magic-users level up, they can get more spells, but they can only choose one per level. Everything else must be acquired trough scrolls, NPCs (or other PCs), and so on. This is seldom an easy process: you might fail to learn from a scroll, and NPCs might require magic items in exchange of spells.

Once again, the book is trying to limit PCs, but this time it does so in a very interesting way for both clerics and magic-users. Now they cannot simply handwave the origin of their spells. On the contrary, they have to engage with the setting to build their PC's repertoire. And there is enough randomness in the game that two magic-users will never be alike.

This sounds fair. Fighters get their "special powers" by finding magic items, intelligent swords, etc., and they usually don't get to choose (unless you're using something like proficiencies or Old School Feats). There should be a balance between choice and chance, and I think AD&D does pretty well in this regard.

RECOVERY OF SPELLS

Spell recovery requires time (again - this is the linchpin), to a maximum 12 hours of sleep plus 15 minutes for each spell level to be recovered. This create meaningful choices - what RPGs are all about. And is also a bit more fair to fighters (they need to rest a lot to recover all their HP).

SPELL CASTING

Next we get a small section explaining how spells work within the fictional world (reportedly taking inspiration from Vance and Bellair). Enticing, short, and clear.

TRIBAL SPELL CASTERS

This sections explain that various humanoids (ogres, orcs, bugbears, trolls, giants, etc.) have their own "shamans" (clerics) and "witch-doctors" (magic-users/clerics). Unfortunately, it does not tell you  if the witch-doctors have grimoires... (I would guess they don't).

While the section was interesting and useful (for suggesting spells and levels for these creatures), I don't find this distinction between shaman and cleric or mage and witch doctor to have much merit, especially as they are restricted to NPCs. It feels a bit like PC "races" can only be "civilized" fighting against "barbaric" foes. Why not have a PC or human/elf shaman? Also, did they forget ogre mages?

We could get something useful out of this (e.g.,  different forms of magic), but as written it feels insufficient and detached from the rest of the game (classes, random encounters, Monster Manual, etc.).

SPELL EXPLANATIONS

This section details particular spell. I'll skip this part entirely; it is basically impossible to understand without the PHB, and it is only separated from it because the books weren't written at the same time.  From a brief glance, most explanations sounds both sensible and flavorful.

What have we learned today?

The bit about time, if considered seriously, is definitely a game-changer. I don't remember the exact rules for spell acquisition in B/X, but the ones in the DMG are pretty good. And, okay, I'll admit, I might add a troll shaman or two to my games.

Coming next... THE ADVENTURE!

Additional reading (on time and spells):
https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2022/04/real-time-dungeon-exploration.html
https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2022/05/railroading-in-space-and-time-and.html
https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-best-way-to-get-spells-in-d.html
https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2020/02/living-spells.html

Quote from: Eric Diaz on June 16, 2023, 09:38:29 AM
First, I've made an index for the series so you can read all parts.

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2023/06/dmg-1e-cover-to-cover-index.html

Here is part IV, my favorite so far.

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2023/06/ad-dmg-cover-to-cover-part-iv-pages-37.html

TIME

So, I went "digging" into the DMG... and now I think I've found some gold. This single page made me want to completely change the way I run games. It might be the most interesting part so far.

Of course this is not the first time I've read this. This part contains a famous quote in all caps. In addition, many people have been talking about this lately most notably Jeffro Johnson. Here is a relevant bit:

    Game time is of utmost importance. Failure to keep careful track of time expenditure by player characters will result in many anomalies in the game. The stricture of time is what makes recovery of hit points meaningful. Likewise, the time spent adventuring in wilderness areas removes concerned characters from their bases of operation — be they rented chambers or battlemented strongholds. Certainly the most important time stricture pertains to the manufacture of magic items, for during the period of such activity no
    adventuring can be done. Time is also considered in gaining levels and learning new languages and more. All of these demands upon game time force choices upon player characters, and likewise number their days of game life.
    One of the things stressed in the original game of D&D was the importance of recording game time with respect to each and every player character in a campaign. In AD&D it is emphasized even more: YOU CAN NOT HAVE A MEANINGFUL CAMPAIGN IF STRICT TIME RECORDS ARE NOT KEPT.

The gist of this section is emphasizing how important time keeping is for your campaign. This includes not only turns and rounds but also days, weeks and months. The book also stresses the importance of downtime and rotating characters. For example, when a PC is hurt, diseased, or busy with an important project (e.g., researching spells or creating a magic item), you should go adventuring without him or her - or maybe using an entire different party. Even better, you can have multiple groups of players, and different parties, as hinted before.

The method Gygax used for that is "real time": If one week has passed in the real world, one week has passed in the game world. This means a player could be using a different character for months. Of course you will occasionally need to freeze time between sessions, but now the clock is not working only at the players (in their characters) convenience. Time-railroading is limited. This gives the campaign a much more satisfying, organic feel.

For smaller units of time, the book recommends careful note keeping. I'm not a big fan of this, but you can easily be replaced by real time too, as I suggested here and apparently has become popular in other games lately.

Time seems to be the glue that holds many rules together: Healing, researching, building, random encounters, searching, torches, diseases, etc. Once you ignore it, everything seems to come crashing down. Maybe this is one of the fundamental ideas of old school play.

There is much to ponder about this section. For now, I'll just recommend that you read it yourself, in its entirety. This is the first time in this series that I do that.

CHARACTER SPELLS (plus ACQUISITION)

After finishing this important section on time I thought I could glance over the section on spells. However, there's important stuff here too.

The first parts of this section are about spell acquisition.  I always disliked the idea  that clerics get ALL spells "for free". Here, the book makes clear that this requires continued service in favor of a deity - and, for higher level spells, direct communication with their gods! An "unfaithful" cleric must perform sacrifice and atonement to get spells (which may require time), but changing deities might have irreversible consequences (including instant death, which is less interesting). Similar rules apply to paladins.

Starting magic-users get additional spells and scrolls when compared to B/X,  but here it is clear that these spells are random. The book provides a small table that ensures they'll be varied enough:


Illusionists follow a similar pattern. Some spell choice is permitted on "difficult campaigns".

As magic-users level up, they can get more spells, but they can only choose one per level. Everything else must be acquired trough scrolls, NPCs (or other PCs), and so on. This is seldom an easy process: you might fail to learn from a scroll, and NPCs might require magic items in exchange of spells.

Once again, the book is trying to limit PCs, but this time it does so in a very interesting way for both clerics and magic-users. Now they cannot simply handwave the origin of their spells. On the contrary, they have to engage with the setting to build their PC's repertoire. And there is enough randomness in the game that two magic-users will never be alike.

This sounds fair. Fighters get their "special powers" by finding magic items, intelligent swords, etc., and they usually don't get to choose (unless you're using something like proficiencies or Old School Feats). There should be a balance between choice and chance, and I think AD&D does pretty well in this regard.

RECOVERY OF SPELLS

Spell recovery requires time (again - this is the linchpin), to a maximum 12 hours of sleep plus 15 minutes for each spell level to be recovered. This create meaningful choices - what RPGs are all about. And is also a bit more fair to fighters (they need to rest a lot to recover all their HP).

SPELL CASTING

Next we get a small section explaining how spells work within the fictional world (reportedly taking inspiration from Vance and Bellair). Enticing, short, and clear.

TRIBAL SPELL CASTERS

This sections explain that various humanoids (ogres, orcs, bugbears, trolls, giants, etc.) have their own "shamans" (clerics) and "witch-doctors" (magic-users/clerics). Unfortunately, it does not tell you  if the witch-doctors have grimoires... (I would guess they don't).

While the section was interesting and useful (for suggesting spells and levels for these creatures), I don't find this distinction between shaman and cleric or mage and witch doctor to have much merit, especially as they are restricted to NPCs. It feels a bit like PC "races" can only be "civilized" fighting against "barbaric" foes. Why not have a PC or human/elf shaman? Also, did they forget ogre mages?

We could get something useful out of this (e.g.,  different forms of magic), but as written it feels insufficient and detached from the rest of the game (classes, random encounters, Monster Manual, etc.).

SPELL EXPLANATIONS

This section details particular spell. I'll skip this part entirely; it is basically impossible to understand without the PHB, and it is only separated from it because the books weren't written at the same time.  From a brief glance, most explanations sounds both sensible and flavorful.

What have we learned today?

The bit about time, if considered seriously, is definitely a game-changer. I don't remember the exact rules for spell acquisition in B/X, but the ones in the DMG are pretty good. And, okay, I'll admit, I might add a troll shaman or two to my games.

Coming next... THE ADVENTURE!

Additional reading (on time and spells):
https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2022/04/real-time-dungeon-exploration.html
https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2022/05/railroading-in-space-and-time-and.html
https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2018/01/the-best-way-to-get-spells-in-d.html
https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2020/02/living-spells.html

Yeah.  AD&D was very much about the expenditure and marshalling of resources.  Time is an often (and easily) overlooked resource, unless you are playing a "counting clock" type adventure.  I frequently have to remind myself that ignoring time gives the players very different levels of resources than strictly bounded time does...

I love 1:1 time, it adds a lot to any campaign, but the real magic is with multi-group campaigns.

Quote from: Eric Diaz on June 16, 2023, 09:38:29 AM
RECOVERY OF SPELLS

Spell recovery requires time (again - this is the linchpin), to a maximum 12 hours of sleep plus 15 minutes for each spell level to be recovered. This create meaningful choices - what RPGs are all about. And is also a bit more fair to fighters (they need to rest a lot to recover all their HP).

Spell recovery is something I think is of massive significance to the game. If we're talking a higher level party on a long quest involving wilderness travel, you really only get 12 hours of daily downtime. If a magic-user or cleric takes 6 hours of sleep, that leaves just 6 hours to study spells, giving them only 24 spell-levels worth renewable daily. By 8th level, you can't replenish all your slots daily anymore. So there's a real ceiling on spell fire power imposed here.

This means there's a limit on daily renewable healing spells, and therefore a limit on how much hit point loss a party can recover daily. It will vary depending on exact level and party composition, but it tops out somewhere around 15 or 16 hit points per party member renewable daily. You could have a 15th level fighter with over 100 hit points, but you can still only lose 15 or 16 daily sustainably.

These are a couple of the reasons the power curve in 1E flattens out dramatically after name level, far more than a casual observer would appreciate just by doing some superficial math. You don't get wizards with quadratic growth that become dramatically more powerful than the rest of the party. You also don't get level-capped demi-humans being left in the dust. A lot of the ideas associated with D&D in general, or at least high level D&D, actually hinge on ignoring the spell recovery limitation.

You could probably write a book called "Your Friends Are Wrong About D&D," and at least 40% of it would link back to this rule one way or another.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 16, 2023, 12:47:22 PM
Yeah.  AD&D was very much about the expenditure and marshalling of resources.  Time is an often (and easily) overlooked resource, unless you are playing a "counting clock" type adventure.  I frequently have to remind myself that ignoring time gives the players very different levels of resources than strictly bounded time does...

True. There must be SOME counting clock - torches, encounters, whatever. Giving the PCs all the time in the world changes the game significantly.

Quote from: S'mon on June 16, 2023, 04:54:53 PM
I love 1:1 time, it adds a lot to any campaign, but the real magic is with multi-group campaigns.

Makes sense, although 1:! times keeps things straight. Multi-group with multiple timelines could get confusing...

Quote from: Lunamancer on June 17, 2023, 01:24:11 AM
Spell recovery is something I think is of massive significance to the game. If we're talking a higher level party on a long quest involving wilderness travel, you really only get 12 hours of daily downtime. If a magic-user or cleric takes 6 hours of sleep, that leaves just 6 hours to study spells, giving them only 24 spell-levels worth renewable daily. By 8th level, you can't replenish all your slots daily anymore. So there's a real ceiling on spell fire power imposed here.

This means there's a limit on daily renewable healing spells, and therefore a limit on how much hit point loss a party can recover daily. It will vary depending on exact level and party composition, but it tops out somewhere around 15 or 16 hit points per party member renewable daily. You could have a 15th level fighter with over 100 hit points, but you can still only lose 15 or 16 daily sustainably.

These are a couple of the reasons the power curve in 1E flattens out dramatically after name level, far more than a casual observer would appreciate just by doing some superficial math. You don't get wizards with quadratic growth that become dramatically more powerful than the rest of the party. You also don't get level-capped demi-humans being left in the dust. A lot of the ideas associated with D&D in general, or at least high level D&D, actually hinge on ignoring the spell recovery limitation.

You could probably write a book called "Your Friends Are Wrong About D&D," and at least 40% of it would link back to this rule one way or another.

Yes, "quadratic wizards" is what happens if you ignore rules like this!

QuoteThe Russians for example, developed the Chekan--which was a hand weapon that combined a hammer-head on one side, and a short, puncturing steel spike on the other side. Absolutely brutal against any kind of opponent, whether they were on foot or mounted.

For a historical correction - chekans - ergo battle pick-axes are known from Bronze Age, and they spread to Europe first with Alans, and then various Turkic tribes. Become very popular among Slavic people - alpinist ice axes are called chekans in Polish - but they are not Russian nor Polish invention .