[Ptolus/AD&D] OOC Thread #1

[Cole]

I am confused about something though! I kind of fucked up yesterday when I posted an answer of Cadfan to Othos there which only included the first sentence, but then edited and added Angharad's line and his final agreement. At the same time Cole was writing his post, so I'm guessing I confused him too.

Ah! I did miss that. I had read Cadfan's statement as "please do not bother him" and was working from there without Angharad's section.

[Imperator]

Ben how long does Gareth think it would take to rebuild the platform, assuming all capable people here lend a hand?

[Benoist]

Ben how long does Gareth think it would take to rebuild the platform, assuming all capable people here lend a hand?

To do it well, spending time to make sure everything's working properly, using the manpower you got here (which is significant) it might take a day. Maybe a tad less.

[Benoist]

FYI (since you're in a couple of threads at the same time), Othos just invited Rissthil to join them as well.

Oh OK. Well if Rissthil's following you guys, he'll have the option to just go over the new thread I just posted. Otherwise, he stays in the main room.

[Imperator]

To do it well, spending time to make sure everything's working properly, using the manpower you got here (which is significant) it might take a day. Maybe a tad less.

Crap. Guys, that is too much.

[winkingbishop]

Question about the setting: Do people know what's in the Spire?
Next question: What's in the Spire?

[Benoist]

Do people know what's in the Spire?
In the Spire? No, they do not.

What's in the Spire?
You do not know, but can formulate all the theories you want...

[Cole]

DM: Delbaeth rolls Survive Resurrection: 50. He survives (failure would not have killed him but would have made him sink further into dementia).
Is Delbaeth coming back to consciousness? Roll: 62. Yes. He is now conscious.

Appreciate the transparency on stuff like the Res roll.

[Benoist]

Appreciate the transparency on stuff like the Res roll.

Thought you might like that.

[Imperator]

Come on, guys, let's repair the platform and get to the adventure! I would love to do at least a first scouting expedition ASAP. We have hostages down there!

Down... to adventure!

[Benoist]

Referring to this DM note here on the IC thread.
There is no such thing as a roll-under ability score mechanic in the AD&D game.

Part of the potential pleasure there is with this game is for you to figure out how to solve the different problems and situations that your characters end up facing in the game world. Rolling ability scores are mostly unproductive towards that goal, because they basically shortcut your own thought-process into a "ah fuck that, I'll roll instead" reflex that just makes the game poorer for it.

So I'm going to avoid these types of checks when I can, which asks from you to sometimes extrapolate on what your characters know and don't know. I will make judgment calls on what your characters may or may not notice or know, and indeed, I'm taking your races, classes etc into account, so what I'm describing to you may differ according to who is inspecting or dealing with what. Your success/failure to act on some clues or information provided to you via my descriptions then becomes your own (assuming you're asking for clarifications when you need some, when you get confused etc).

In some cases, despite the clues available to me to make judgment calls, there are going to be some things that will require to determine more precise outcomes based on a wide variety of circumstances. This is when die rolls are called for. When die rolls are called for, I'm not going to use roll-under stats rolls, but instead a variant of my own OD&D resolution mechanics: you basically roll 1d100, and I compare the ability score concerned with a rating on a resistance table similar to RuneQuest's (this is all based on the Perrin Conventions, which are basically a set of OD&D houserules which ultimately would lead to the creation of the Basic Role Playing game system). Now, in my OD&D rules these rolls are made using d20 roll-over, but its basically the same principle. The reason we're using d100 here is because it meshes well with the AD&D rules, which use things like System Shock and percentiles for Thief/Assassin abilities. It's part of the greater logic of the game system itself, so I'm basically reworking it so that the coherence of the game is maintained.

[Cranewings]

Sounds good. I think my old 1e group from years ago must have just used the roll under as a house rule. I played with it for so long, so long ago, I thought it was normal.

[Benoist]

Sounds good. I think my old 1e group from years ago must have just used the roll under as a house rule. I played with it for so long, so long ago, I thought it was normal.

I'm sure it was/is one of the most usual houserules to the game. I've used it too ages ago, and knew a buttload of GMs using it too. It's one of those intuitive houserules that seem to make sense when it pops into your mind as you play the game, but actually, IMO, really don't when you think about the rules system.

What you're doing when rolling d20 under a stat is basically like rolling Stat x5 in percentile. It doesn't take into account anything outside of your character's stat, so if you try to lift a rock of 50 pounds or a rock of 200 pounds, it ends up being the same roll you make. That makes no sense to me, and bothered me already two decades ago when I myself was using it, to tell you the truth. Sure, you can use modifiers on the roll or stat or whatnot. It just seems terribly wonky and still relies on the rating of the character way too much, IMO.

The RQ resistance table is wonderful in this regard. It means that you can give stat ratings to pretty much anything in the game, with "10" being medium, under being weak, and over being strong. Opposing these elements to determine probabilities mean that your stat basically is put against something objective, on a human scale, in the game world. It's not some ad hoc modifier applied to your stat.

Some people might not care. Hell, you really don't have to. In game play it just means you're rolling a different die and I'm determining probabilities of success/failure differently. But in case this interests you, that's something I've been thinking about a lot when building my OD&D houserules, and that's basically the logic you see here.

Still. Remember this: this is supposed to be about you having fun dealing with the game's situations. Not your character. So you won't be rolling dice for anything and everything. Just sometimes.

[winkingbishop]

Since I confused the NPC, I assume I should have communicated more clearly in this post.  Sorry about that.  I was being shooed out of the office at work and was trying to squeeze several thoughts into one statement..

Othos was primarily commenting on his bravery during the conflict.  It was good of the elf to look for his comrade Bertold even though there was a lot of danger.  Plus, it was good that he ran when he did, otherwise our employer would have had no warning or message of what happened.  Basically, Othos was giving him props.

I was trying to work my way out of the encounter, but did want to specify two other things.  Ulas may have other questions.  Timing wise, Othos should be in the room and I should wait for Cole to confirm or deny this.

In the last line, Othos is actually trying to ask the elf if he perhaps has anything he wants to say we didn't ask about.  Warnings, omens, doomy death, suggestions, that sort of thing.

Again, sorry about the confusion.  I probably should have just cancelled the line but it looked like the pace was picking up at the time and I wanted to keep things moving.

[Benoist]

Oh no, it's cool. No need to apologize. The NPC is confused. I am not.