Dices & situations.

I thought about it lately and have come to the conclusion that there was another difference between the new school and the old school.

Basically there are three types of situations :
Case 1 (referred to as 'precedence of chaos') : the dices interpret the scene;
Case 2 (referred to as 'precedence of characters') : the scene interpret the dices;
Case 3 (referred to as 'roll playing') : there is no interpretation beyond mere numbers.  

Let me explain this concept : it is simply the issue of what came before. Is it the dice roll, or the description of the action ? Or more simply, who describes the action / attempt? The players or the master?

For example, when a character tries to disarm his foe, it is clearly case 1, whereas if following a lucky shot, the character makes the monster retreat into a precipice (or when you make a reaction /morale roll), it is rather the case 2. When a character inflict 5 damage points to the monster, this is case 3. 

It is obvious that the three types of dice rolls should be present in a game (or in the rules of a role-playing game): case 1 to ensure that players' creativity and control can express themselves, case 2 so that unexpected and referee's creativity can spice up the game, and case 3 to highlight the other cases. 

But things are a little obscure when we look at the games of the new school : 'precedence of chaos' becomes 'precedence of history' and 'precedence of characters' becomes 'precedence of rules'. Indeed, codifying actions of the characters means giving free rein to comparative and therefore to
umbers-based desicions (or metagame). The choice is stolen to players by the rules. Similarly, scenario and rules steal the freedom of the dungeon master. Rules impose their tyranny by curbing players as much as referees. 


In conclusion, choose chaos rather than rules !
  

[Monster] Ogres

To celebrate the fourth member of this blog, here's another interpretation* of this iconic OD&D monster that I dedicate to Bruce Heard!

*Remember, in monsters and treasures, creatures only have characteristics and an explanatory text of three lines, which leave much to the imagination of the DM.

I also want to make a small tribute to Sham, who disappeared from the blogosphere for a while but whose blog remains essential.

OGRE : No. Appearing: 3-18, AC: 5, Move: 9, HD: 4+1
 
Ogres are huge humanoids with bulging muscles and long arms that hang almost to the ground. Their massive fists as hard as stone inflict 1d6 +2 points of damage. Curiously, their cranium is external and not internal as with other humanoids, so that people often believe that ogres wear skull helmets. 

"Ogres have a mysterious history. It is not known exactly how they came into being, whether they were created with this world, or whether the union of some eons past races gave spawn to them, as Ogres do not have gender nor do they reproduce. What is known is that there is a finite number of Ogres in he world, and their very existence is threatened by the rise of man. Ogres apparently are immortal, and even those Ogres who have been slain and laid to rest are never truly dead, for their souls are tied to this world."

When an Ogre dies, its body is reduced to dust and his demonic spirit is released. The spirit wanders in the depths until it finds an entire corpse and insinuates in it (however it must wait 1d12 rounds after his death before reincarnating), causing a horrible mutation. The body deforms and eventually transform into that of an Ogre in great shape. The spirit of the ogre can cross all materials except lead and silver. Locked in a cage shaped in such a metal, it can not escape and may then be put to sleep for decades before an oblivious looter releases it ...

Defeating an ogre is very difficult: One must find the gem that the dark sorcerer used to summon this evil spirit and destroy it. This gem is always valuable, but it is rarely in possession of the ogre. These stupid monsters are unaware of the power of these gemstones which are surely hidden somewhere, perhaps in the hoard of another monster. 

Combat Mutilations II

Part I

Question is: what consequences are those mutilations going to have on the character?

-porphyre77

These consequences are largely not very restrictive. The goal is not to make unplayable characters, but to feel the violence of the fight (and then anyway, if they have a mutilation, that's because they were below 0 hit points, and they should normally be dead by the rules). Consider this as a saving throw to sacrifice a body part in exchange for life.

Severed finger : no effect
Severed foot : decreased movement of one level
Blind eye : -1 on surprise rolls.
Severed hand : no two-handed weapons
Severed leg : decreased movement of two level
Severed arm : no two-handed weapons, -1 Strenght and Dexterity point  

Combat Mutilations

Mutilations, even if they are usually not very fun for players, add some character and a certain uniqueness to the characters. If I had to take this aspect into consideration, I think I would go with a rule like this:

From 0 hp, the character falls into unconsciousness. At the end of the fight, see the following table:
0, saving throw vs death, succeeded : survival, failed : death.
-1, saving throw vs death, succeeded : severed finger, failed : death.
-2, saving throw vs death, succeeded : severed foot, failed : death.
-3, saving throw vs death, succeeded : blind eye, failed : death.
-4, saving throw vs death, succeeded : severed hand, failed : death.
-5, saving throw vs death, succeeded : severed leg, failed : death.
-6, saving throw vs death, succeeded : severed arm, failed : death.    

[Monster] Ophidian undead

I was not very active lately. However, I created a new monster to scare to death your beginners as high-level parties.

Ophidian Undead

No. Appearing: 1-10
Armor Class: 7
Hit Dice: 2
Movement : 60'
Attacks: See Below
Alignment: Chaotic

In the distant kingdom of Stygia, the priests of Set perform strange rituals in the heart of darkened temples.One of the worst is the Call of the Swarms of the Snake God. Nobody except the evil clergy of Set knows how to proceed the ritual, but what is certain is that it ends with the invocation of amphisbaenians. These two-headed snakes with fangs dripping with venom then creep into a corpse through the nostrils and animate it with an unholy life, blowing up the eyeballs if they are still in place. These walking corpses have therefore instead of eyes the two heads of the amphisbaena pointing in the empty sockets.

In addition to the attack by the undead (1d6 damage), each head of the amphisbaena tries to bite every round to inoculate their poison, suddenly arising of the eye sockets and retracting the second after. Bites that are benign do not damage but if a saving throw versus poison is failed, the victim convulse for 3d6 rounds. Two simultaneous bites on the same person entails a saving throw against death.

Killing the undead does not necessarily kill the snake: if it is cornered and alone, it is killed automatically by the characters if they specify it. Otherwise, in a melee, the amphisbaena has a chance to escape and animate another body.

They are repelled by clerics as ghouls. 

Magic shields shall be splintered !

Original rule.

I always thought D&D magic armor and shields tasteless, as negative armor classes bored me. Recently, I reread this Brian's rule and I had a kind of epiphany. So this is my version of this rule, in addition to my variant magic shields.

Shields shall be splintered :  

Anytime you are about to take damage (after a successful enemy hit but but before the damage roll) and have a shield equipped, you may choose to sacrifice the shield in order to avoid incurring the wound. This way, 1d6 points of damage is avoided. Since all weapons deal 1d6 points of damage, that means damage is avoided. In the case of bonus damage (because of strong opponents, as ogres for example, or magic weapons), only these bonuses are actually inflicted. 

An Ogre attacks a Warrior and manage to hit him. The character decides to discard his shield, and therefore suffers only 2 points of damage (the bonus damage).

In the case of magical shields, invoking this rule means that you subtract 1d6 + Xd6 damage from the blow, X is the number of “pluses” from its enchantment. Thus, a +1 shield would subtract 2d6, a +2 shield subtract 3d6, etc. A magical shield can undergo a blow* per day before being damaged. In this case, the shield loses one “plus” from its enchantment. Thus, a +1 shield would become a normal shield, a +2 shield becomes a +1 shield, etc.

*or X blows, but it seems too powerful.

Magic shield "pluses" does not apply to armor class.

Supplement II : Blackmoor - Assassins

Dernière étape avant que je m'attaque à Temple of the Frog : l'assassin !
JB m'ayant précédé sur le sujet, je vais me contenter d'étendre son analyse en ajoutant quelques points que je trouve importants.

Les assassins, dans Blackmoor, font obligatoirement partie de LA guilde des Assassins. Immédiatement, ce point nous évoque quelques références historiques ou littéraires : les Nizârites (des hérétiques chiites ismaélites qui ont sévi entre le 11e et 13e siècle au Moyen-Orient sous la houlette du Vieux de la Montagne), les Sicaires juifs (la branche extrémiste des Zélotes qui combattait l'occupation romaine en assassinant dignitaires romains et collaborateurs juifs de 50 à 70, avant de conduire la première guerre judéo-romaine) et la Confrérie des Tueurs - Slayers' Brotherhood - (une branche de la Guilde des Voleurs de Lankhmar créée par Fritz Leiber). Ces trois références évoquent incontestablement le Moyen-Orient (respectivement la Syrie-Perse, la Judée, et un monde sword and sorcery oriental).

La Neutralité imposée est aussi un indice révélateur, quoique déroutant. Si on se place dans le contexte d'OD&D avec son alignement comme une "position" (voir mon post en anglais sur le sujet), cela tombe sous le sens, étant donné que l'assassin était à l'origine, dans les LBBs, un spécialiste PNJ engagé pour une mission (une variante de l'espion), donc totalement à l'écart des luttes de pouvoir (puisque recruté uniquement avec de l'argent) et ne répondant qu'au maître de la Guilde. Mais si on considère le fait qu'historiquement les sectes d'assassins avaient toutes une facette religieuse, cette neutralité est assez surprenante sachant que les Clercs de haut niveau dans OD&D doivent choisir soit la Loi, soit le Chaos. Peut-être un type de religion païenne (mais les Druides de Greyhawk sont Chaotiques !). Plutôt une philosophie religieuse, alors, d'où la Neutralité. 

Idées à en tirer :

• Il existe dans le monde de Blackmoor une guilde d'Assassins, spécialisés dans le déguisement et les langues, commandée par un mystérieux grand-maître auquel on peut faire appel pour organiser des assassinats politiques (ou seulement des menaces). Ces meurtres sont le plus souvent commis dans la foule avec des longs poignards ou des sicas enduits de poison. Les Assassins ont interdiction de tuer d'autres personnes que leur cible. 
• Cette secte mystique est installée dans les bastions montagneux d'une région en Orient, où sa philosophie étrange lui attire les foudres des royaumes et sultanats païens adjacents, qui sont néanmoins terrifiés par les capacités presque surnaturelles des Assassins. Fanatiques, les disciples du Grand Maître tenteront d'accomplir leur mission jusqu'à la mort ou la réussite, et ne commettront jamais de suicide.  
• Le Grand Maître peut-être défié en combat singulier ou assassiné par un des Assassins qui prendra alors sa place. 

Hmm ! Tout ça a vraiment un goût exotique de Sword and Sorcery !