Delving Deeper Leech Class

This is a Delving Deeper version of the Leech class.

XP/HD/Save: As Thief. Prime ability is Intelligence.
Weaponry and Armor: Any armor, Magic-User weapons.
Abilities: Replace

• backstab with Healing,
• stealth/movement abilities with sanitation, hygiene, diagnosis and prevention abilities,
• lockpicking/trap removal with first aid abilities.

Let them keep the Thief ability to decipher inscriptions (perhaps restricting this to identification labels on poison or medicine bottles and other health-related writings instead of treasure maps) and magic scrolls (perhaps limited to cleric scrolls.)

Costs and explanation of abilities are the same as for the other version.

Random Melee Targets

The alternative combat system in Men & Magic has few details, so most of us OD&D GMs assume that players pick a target, make an attack roll, and (if successful) roll for damage to that target. And that's the way many of us handled combat in AD&D, too, when we started playing a thousand weird amalgams of AD&D and other D&D versions. But AD&D says something different about attacks:

Who Attacks Whom:

As with missile fire, it is generally not possible to select a specific opponent in a mass melee. If this is the case, simply use some random number generation to find out which attacks are upon which opponents, remembering that only a certain number of attacks can usually be made upon one opponent.

(DMG, p. 71)

This is important because the Delving Deeper errata that has just been released adds a new fighter ability:

Starting at 4th level [the fighter] adds +1 to morale rolls of any troops he leads in combat, and is no longer subject to randomized missile or melee hits while there are other targets available.

(DD Adventurer's Handbook, p. 10)

Heroes basically can't be harmed by random combat effects; those who are less than heroic are targetted first, unless an attacker is able to specifically aim at the hero. This implies that in at least some cases, melee targets are randomized, just like AD&D.

I think a simple way to handle these situations is to roll damage for the attack, then have all possible random targets roll a d6; whichever die roll matches the damage roll is struck. Ties go to the quickest.

Fearful Undead

I noticed something in OD&D I overlooked before: the undead might have to make morale rolls.

This came up because of the recent Delving Deeper errata. There's a note that ghouls have -2 to morale rolls in daylight. That's not in the LBBs, but it turns out that it *is* in Chainmail. In fact, Chainmail lists morale numbers for wraiths, specters and vampires, too. Only skeletons and zombies are fearless.

In contrast, the AD&D monster manual says that ghouls attack without fear. I seem to recall that later AD&D materials explicitly exempt undead from feeling fear -- so, no morale rolls.

My first reaction was "Screw it, the living dead shouldn't be afraid of anything except a cleric showing true faith. The Turn Undead roll is the only morale roll needed."

But we do have vampires afraid of the cross and of garlic. And a fear of sunlight or bright light isn't too far from genre expectations. Also, holy water. Not to mention that we could add unique fears to unique undead: forcing a ghost to view its own corpse might act like Turn Undead on that corpse, and zombies might be afraid of carrion birds.

So my current thinking is: the undead are not afraid of simple death and cannot normally be intimidated, but certain symbols of faith, light, or purity can trigger morale rolls.

Delving Deeper Update/Errata

The (free) Delving Deeper Reference Rules PDFs have been updated on RPGNow, I've only had a chance to look briefly at the errata document, which is supposed to cover all the changes made between v1 and v2. One of the main changes is that a couple things from Chainmail have been added (not combat rules, but some descriptive things about creatures and a couple fighter bonuses.) There was an error in the first reference doc, though, where two saving throw categories are swapped in every class. Also, they seem to have tweaked the hit dice progression for M-Us and Thieves.

I haven't noticed yet if they've fixed the cleric spell progression. Probably not, because I think that was an intentional choice.

I'll have more commentary after I've had a chance to examine it.

In My Mailbox RITE NOW!

I first heard about this Pulp-o-Mizer that creates your own sci-fi magazine cover from my kibologist friends, but Christopher B beat me to the punch to tell the D&D blog community about it.

I created this cover to commemorate receiving word that my copy of the Delving Deeper boxed set has arrived, so I'll be going to pick it up in a few minutes.

Delving Deeper: Referee's Guide

This is Part Three of a critique of the Delving Deeper rules system and the changes from the original rules it includes. Part One covered character classes. Part Two covered spells. This time, it's the referee's rules for building dungeons and wilderness, and running the game.

Most of the procedures described are the same as the original, or close enough. Combat and saves are about the same; all the miscellaneous adventure event rolls have been regularized to a 1d6 roll. This winds up working similar to my own situation roll approach, except that DD assumes low is bad, high is good, whereas I assume that low = no change, high = change, so that I don't have to change target numbers as often. Evasion in the wilderness has been simplified to fit into this 1d6 model and looks pretty good.

The reaction table has the range of an Uncertain result extended (5 to 9, instead of 6 to 8.) This is also used for morale rolls. The subduing rules, though, seem very confusing. Here's how I interpreted the Delving Deeper subduing rules as written in the currently-available version:

1. Declare that all attacks will be to subdue, and start keeping track of subduing damage separately;
2. Divide subduing damage by total hit points and convert to a percentage (same as original rules, up to this point;)
3. Roll morale on 2d6; a result less than the percentage means the opponent is subdued.

This would cause Average dragons to be subdued after 3 or 4 hits, which couldn't possibly be the intention. However, we discussed this on the ODD74 forum and the errata will now clarify that step 3 is a percentile dice roll, not a standard 2d6 morale roll. This probably won't make it into the upcoming box set, though.

Treasure stocking rolls have been tweaked to eliminate the "Treasure by Dungeon Level" table. The "Wandering Monster by Dungeon Level" table has been altered so that only 1st and 2nd level monsters appear on Level 1, but some of the more powerful monsters have been moved to lower levels, so it may work out the same; a medusa is now a 2nd level monster, for example. On the other hand, a random trap type table has been added, with some pretty good descriptions

Wilderness movement rates have been changed. DD switches to the 6-mile hex, then reduces movement to 2 hexes per day, or only 1 per day if encumbered. If you assume it's using a 3-mile league (one hex = 2 hours travel,) this reduces total time spent traveling each day to 4 hours max, which may be a problem, depending on how you interpret this. Marine and aerial travel rules are about the same, although like the LBBs, DD doesn't define any of the sailing terminology; also, for some reason, tacking appears on the aerial movement table as well; I'm not sure if this is an improvement or an error.

If your crew is dumped overboard, DD simply assumes that half of them drown immediately, which is a time-saver. It still uses d6 rolls for the remainder of the crew.

The sample dungeon in DD and also the wandering monster tables include deliberate sci-fi elements, perhaps to recapture the more gonzo feel of some of the original dungeons. I'm OK with this, but other people will need to adjust their wandering monster tables accordingly. This is also true of the DD monster book, which I will get to next.

DD Monk Modification

When I posted yesterday's assassin and monk classes on the ODD74 forums, it was pointed out that, unlike the assassin or thief's surprise attack, the monk's barehand attack could be used repeatedly. I think this isn't too unbalancing, since the monk risks things like petrifaction, contact poison, acid or slime coating, or just plain needing to get closer than someone using a weapon. But I can see how that might not be limited enough.

Fortunately, Delving Deeper has rules for striking to subdue (I'll be talking about them in my next DD critique article.) We can use these rules to put a limit on the monk's attacks: if the monk uses a barehand attack against an armored target, only subduing damage is done unless the monk's natural armor class is better than the target's armor.

Monks from 1st through 4th level have a natural armor class of 9. They do real injury against AC 9 or 8 opponents. They make barehand subdue attacks against AC 7 or better.

Monks from 5th through 9th level have a natural armor class of 5. They do real injury against AC 7 through 4. They make barehand subdue attacks against AC 3 and 2.

Monks of 10th level or better have a natural armor class of 3. They do real injury to any opponent except those harmed only by magic weapons.

Delving Deeper Assassin and Monk

I originally posted this to the ODD74 forums and was considering making some changes and posting here, but decided to repost this as-is. After reading Tim Kask's blog post about the class level limits for druid, assassin and monk, it occurred to me that you could make a few simple changes to the Delving Deeper thief to turn it into an assassin, for those who need such a class:

• Use Thief hit dice and abilities, but Fighter xp progression;
• Add +1d6 to surprise attack damage;
• Add a disguise ability that works the same as the thief abilities (fools observers on 3+).

You can give assassins the option to learn alignment languages like regular languages, too. The level limit would not be a class feature, but a setting feature: the local guildmaster assassin won't tolerate another assassin of equal level, whatever that is, and neither will the grandfather of assassins, but that's all roleplaying, not a hard limit.

I think you could do a passable monk in a similar way:

• Use Thief hit dice and abilities, but Fighter xp progression;
• Backstab bonus becomes barehand/kick attack bonus;
• Armor class equals armor worn or AC 5 at 5th level, AC 3 at 10th.

Not as fancy as the Blackmoor or AD&D monk, but still in keeping with the David Carradine inspiration. Other monk powers could be added as individual quests instead of class features. ("I heard you know the secret of quivering palm, Master. Will you teach me?" *BOOT TO THE HEAD*)

The reason why I was going to make changes to the classes before posting them here is that they don't quite fit the scheme I was using for class construction and class variants. But swapping the Thief xp for Fighter xp in order to get two extra abilities for the Thief base class seems not too out of place. Perhaps I can expand my scheme? I'll have to think it over...

Delving Deeper: Spells

This is Part Two of a critique of the Delving Deeper rules system and the changes from the original rules it includes. Part One was posted some time ago and covered character classes.

Delving Deeper naturally keeps the well-known Vancian magic system pretty much intact. It even makes explicit that clerics have spell books, something that's hinted at in the original rules, but dropped from later editions. The cost of creating a scroll is 50% higher than the original rules, and DD also applies the "cost per spell level" of AD&D, implying that each spell is on a separate page or multiple pages, as in AD&D. This is in contrast to the flat cost for an entire spell book for a given level, which is in the original rules. These are, of course, minor changes and fairly easy to change back, but there is another, more significant, change: spells can be cast by reading from a spell book, which erases the spell from the book as if it were a scroll. This is certainly not the way I'd run spell books, and I'm not even sure if I could recommend it to others as an emergency spell casting rule. Because of the change in spell costs, it turns a spell book into a collection of slightly over-priced scrolls, with no significant downside. If the minimum cost for a replacement 1st level spell book is 2,000 gp, or if you use the new costs and casting from a spell book has at least a chance of erasing the entire book, it might be more palatable.

The cleric lists includes a few surprise reversed spells not in the original: Obscure Magic, Obscure Alignment,  Obscure Traps, Obscure Object, and Obscure Evil, instead of the more typical (late-edition) Detect Good. Unfortunately, Protection from Evil goes with the late-edition interpretation, making it feel more like a rudimentary second alignment access, instead of "evil" being defined as hostile intent. Animate Dead gets a reversed form, Enervate Dead, and Enervate Reptile has been added so that the reversed form (Animate Reptile) can be used to emulate Sticks to Snakes. I do kind of like that change. Also, Neutralize Poison seems to be weaker, and there is no Slow Poison, so poison effects become much more serious in DD than in the original.

The Sleep spell uses an interpretation I've seen floating around: The GM rolls for the minimum number of hit dice affected, and depending on positioning, the spell may affect the caster's allies as well. I haven't used that interpretation, but I'm tempted; it's a good balance for allowing Sleep to take effect without allowing a saving throw, although this is not hinted at in the DD version of the spell.

The Phantasm spell replaces Phantasmal Forces. In some ways, it's scaled back: no illusion of a squad of warriors, only one warrior at most. In other ways, it's a little tougher: DD resolves the issue of illusory damage by saying that disbelieving an illusion allows a saving throw, and if successful, the one disbelieving can dispel the illusion by touching it. By implication, failing the saving throw means the illusion can't be dispelled by touch, so it can also do damage.

The ESP replacement, Sixth Sense, specifies that the spell detects the contents of thoughts (telepathy,) not just the detection of a thinking creature. Lots of people use this interpretation, so they might not mind the consequences: Clairvoyance and Clairaudience no longer allow viewing/listening through a thinking creature, but work more like the original Wizard Eye. This means that the only benefit of the DD replacement (Witch Eye) is that it is mobile.

Haste and Slow use the later-edition changes of adding or subtracting extra attacks. Protection from Normal Missiles no longer protects against boulders (it didn't protect against ogres or giants throwing boulders, originally, but arguably it protected against catapults.)

Confusion and Contact (Other) Plane seem significantly improved, at least from my point of view, because there are fewer die rolls involved.  Baleful Polymorph (the equivalent of Polymorph Other) has been moved to a higher spell level. Elementals are now affected specifically by Dispel Evil -- but because of the changes to the interpretation of "evil" in cleric spells, this implies that elementals are evil, which may or may not fit with an individual campaign.

It's also mildly interesting that the Reincarnation spell can bring you back as an elf -- but not as the single-class elf that DD makes possible. There are other changes as well, like Control Water, but these don't seem very significant.

In short, I have a problem with the interpretation of "evil" in some spells and the rewrite of Haste/Slow and ESP/Clairvoyance/Clairaudience, like the changes to Sleep, Confusion, and Contact Other Planes, and can probably bear the other changes, although I personally would move Baleful Polymorph back to the same level as Polymorph (Self).

I'll be looking at the GM rules in Part Three.

Delving Deeper Free Version

I'm sure most people who read my blog are already aware, but for those who aren't: the free (no-art) version of the Delving Deeper PDFs are now available for any and all to download. The boxed sets themselves are still not ready; that project has suffered a hell of a lot of setbacks, unavoidable ones. I don't blame John Adams, but it all just hammers home for me how important it is to not set definite expectations, especially when money is involved. I grind away at Liber Zero and the ezines, but I try not to set release dates or pricing specifically because too many things can happen to foil my plans.

I do have a Part Two of my multi-part critical look at the Delving Deeper rules coming up. I finished my notes on the spells section and want to get a post scheduled for Friday, since I'll be away for the weekend and I'm not sure whether I'll be able to post much, if at all. As with the section on characters, I found some changes that surprised me, some I wouldn't use, and some I actually like.

Delving Deeper: Characters

Delving Deeper is getting closer to its actual release, I can't do a full review until I see the actual product, of course, but I've been going through the PDFs looking just at system changes, since the raison d'être of Delving Deeper is to be a truer clone of the original rules than any other. This post is about character creation.

There are a few tweaks in the ability scores, but the things that stand out are the changes to languages and followers. The number of languages known is governed by the higher of two abilities: Intelligence and Wisdom. This change is based on an interpretation of a passage in Men & Magic that I've seen floating around for a while: "Wisdom rating will act much as does that for intelligence." Some people take that to mean that Wisdom functions exactly like Intelligence in every way, and therefore it should govern languages. I interpret this a different way, as I imagine most people do, so I was a little surprised to see this. It's easy to ignore, of course. The number of followers is governed by Charisma, pretty much as in the original rules, but the maximum number is 10 instead of 12. Again, a minor issue, but it does seem to limit characters a little more than the original rules do.

The three main classes are pretty much the same as the original rules, but two class abilities have been changed. First: the Fighter gets a number of attacks against 1 hit die or less opponents equal to the Fighter's level. This may not sound radical, but look closer at that wording: the Fighter doesn't just get to attack multiple opponents, but actually gets multiple attacks. That's a significant difference. We've all tinkered with the "fighter versus cannon fodder" rule, but this just feels wrong to me. I'll be changing this back to 1 opponent per level.

Second: Cleric spell-casting is better, and worse. DD does follow the original rules in that 1st level Clerics can't cast spells; however, instead of being limited to only two spells maximum per spell level until name level,  the Cleric spell progression in DD looks more like the M-U progression, which means Clerics cast more spells... but also means that 4th and 5th level spells are delayed. A 7th level Cleric in D&D can cast a 5th level spell, but a DD Cleric doesn't get those spells for another three levels.

The Thief is presented as an optional class. DD's Thief is closer to the pre-Greyhawk Thief, which was either published in a 'zine or maybe never published at all. Instead of using a table of percentages, DD Thieves have a flat 4 in 6 chance to use any thief ability, and the phenomenal rather than mundane nature of those abilities is carefully spelled out. I like this version of the Thief quite a bit, but I notice that Thief skills don't advance with level at all. I think I'd ameliorate that a little by saying that the Thief gets a +1 bonus on any use of thief skills if the level/HD of an opponent monster or character is less than half the Thief's level. I'd probably even use the dungeon level as the level of traps and locks, to give high-level Thieves a better chance against some locks and traps.

Elves are a little different in two ways. In DD, Elves start with one class only, either Fighter or Magic-User, rather than starting out with both, as most people who played post-Greyhawk interpret them. However, Elves (and, in fact, any non-human) can change class freely back and forth, regardless of their ability scores. This is the way I handle class-switching for elven Fighter/Magic-Users and halfling Fighter/Thieves, so I'm OK with this change; it fits with the original rules, even if that's not actually in the original rules.

I'm almost all the way through the spell descriptions, so I'll be doing that soon.