The Paladin

I've never played a Paladin.

Pretty hard to believe, I know. After all, who hasn't played a Paladin, at least once in their D&D career?

Honestly, the character never interested me. Sure, I played more than my fair share of Bards (the Bard was the ultimate multi-tasker, having spells, thief skills and being okay in combat) and I played an awful lot of Clerics. You're thinking, the whole idea of the Paladin is pretty cool, what's not to like about him?

For some reason I never got into the Paladin, though. I always felt he was (1) unnecessary because a Paladin is basically a Cleric with a sword and (2) part of the general power creep that started in AD&D and never stopped.

I posted earlier about my character creation method. As long as the sum of your character's ability scores is between 63 and 69 (average of between 10.5 and 11.5 per ability) we're gonna get along just fine.

Here's the problem with my 69-sum character generation method and the AD&D Paladin. In order to be an AD&D Paladin, you need the following minimum stats:

Str 12

Int 9

Wis 13

Con 9

Dex (no minimum)

Cha 17

Assuming you actually roll these scores, and the 69-sum ability score method is adhered to, then, based on the above minimum stats for a Paladin, the maximum Dexterity you can roll will be a 9. And using the 69-sum method already has a built-in power-creep factor of an extra point on every ability score (average 11.5 instead of 10.5).

In addition, in order for your Paladin to get the 10% experience bonus in AD&D, you need a Strength of 16 and Wisdom of 16 (ability scores in excess of 15). So to get your experience bonus, you either have a Dexterity of 2, or you need at least a sum of 70 to have a Dexterity of 3. Is this why all Paladins are bumbling pretty-boys?

Frankly, i'm not even sure why a Paladin needs a minimum Charisma of 17. There does not seem to be any Paladin AD&D ability tied to the high Charisma. He does not get any special leadership advantages for being a Paladin. He doesn't even get a retinue of followers or men-at-arms at name-level.

The Paladin, as defined in the AD&D rule-set, raised the bar for every other player, as in order to be competitive with the player playing the Paladin, you had to have your own stats at his level as well. And so power creep was institutionalized in AD&D, and all the D&D iterations that followed.

CharGen: So You Think Can Dance With A Purist?

Back in May 2009, Shamus Young, over at Twenty Sided, wrote a blog regarding the distribution curves that are generated as a result of different character creation methods.

The table you see, above (from Shamus' post) is the distribution of the die-roll results based on the traditional (purist) 3d6 method of character generation. As you can see, the results of a 3d6 character generation method are heavily skewed to the 7-14 score range, with the mean (average) score being 10.5. Most people that have been playing RPGs for some time, are well aquainted with distribution curves, as we tend to pay attention to the related probabilities in our metagaming.

I got a chuckle out of Shamus' opening paragraph to his blog post:

"Based on the comments in the previous post, it seems like many players generate their characters using the following method:
1. Roll 4d6
2. Discard the lowest number
3. Add the remaining three together
4. Wait until the DM isn’t looking
5. Write down whatever numbers you want.
6. Make sure one of them is a 9, just to keep yourself honest."

To avoid this tendency among players, a DM, who is an OD&D purist, might insist that she see every character generation die roll, and that the player record them, in stat-order, for good or ill. But what DM has the time, or inclination, to do this, and where does that leave the trust level between the DM and her players?

In addition, despite what the distribution curve tells us, there are times when someone will have a particularly bad or spectacularly lucky run of dice rolling, and will have either a hopeless character or a super character. Recent versions of D&D have tried to smooth out this variation by implementing the "point-buy" system for character generation, which I think is both a terrible way to create characters, and a contributor to the general diminishment of the art of role-playing.

I promote the 3d6 in stat-order method of character generation. However, I also recognize that players may occasionally be unlucky, lucky, or dodgy in their character generation. My solution, which is definitely NOT purist. is to modify the character stats, after the character is rolled.

If the dice rolls have come up according to the standard distribution, the sum of the scores of all six character stats should be 63 (average score of 10.5 x 6 character stats = 63). If the sum of the character stats are less than 63, I let the player roll the same number of d6's as her character's stats are short of 63.

For example, if the sum of her 6 character stats is 59, she would roll 4d6, one d6 for each point below 63. The number rolled on each d6 corresponds to the stat, in whatever order they are written down. If Strength is in position one, then a die roll of one means strength, if Intelligence is in position two, then a die roll of two means intelligence, and so on. In this example, if she rolled two "1's" and two "2's", she would increase both her Strength and Intelligence by two each.

If the sum of a character's stats are between 63 and 69, I let the player play that character without modification.

However, if the sum of the character's stats exceed 69, I apply the same method (used to improve the below-average character) but in reverse. So again, say the sum of the character's stats are 75, then the player would roll 6d6, since 75 is six higher than 69. The digit rolled on each d6 would correspond the stat holding that position on the character sheet. The player would reduce their score, in each stat, by one point for each time that number was rolled on one of those d6's.

Most people would be okay with a DM allowing the improvement of a "hopeless" character, but why would you penalize a player who got lucky with their dice rolls? The most important reason is to unsure game balance between the players: it's not fun when the characters with average scores are outshone by the super characters, simply because of ability scores. The point of having random dice-roll modifications to the hopeless and super characters, is that it fits with the OD&D philosophy, that you don't pick your stats.

So now you know. When it comes to character generation, I am not a purist, I can house-rule with the best of them.

In Praise of the N00b

We have awesome neighbors.

We live on a quiet culdesac in Citadel, which used to be the community at the highest elevation in Calgary (it's named Citadel for a reason ... back, foul devils!). We have the good fortune of having a great bunch of neighbors. Weekend get-togethers, group camping trips, a yearly block-party, impromptu driveway parties, we enjoy spending time with them.

Recently, we have been teaching the neighbors how to play Settlers of Catan. They seem to be enjoying the game, and this gives us another opportunity to get together with them. More players to get a pick-up game going never hurts!

My point here is, that they were all N00bs, or Newbs, when we started playing Settlers with them. Now several of them are really beginning to show their chops, and the games are getting quite competitive (in a good way). I don't know if this is as big a problem as I imagine, but treating new players (to any game) with distain or derision is a good way to limit your hobby, and also limit your own personal growth.

I enjoy gaming with N00bs. I think they bring a fresh perspective to any game that I quite enjoy. Us grizzled old gamers can learn a thing or two, about immersion, from those newer players.

Hug a N00b today.

The Ultimate Character Record Sheet

There are at least four goals at play, in my efforts at creating a card or counter-based resource management system. One is to make resource management easier. Another is to make resources more visually interesting. A third is to reduce abstraction. The fourth: to reduce the size of the character record sheet.

My ultimate character record sheet might be as small as your typical playing card ... roughly 2.5" x 3.5".

Character Record Sheets

Would it be hyperbole to suggest that there are as many "perfect" D&D character record sheets as there are D&D players?

I have seen many character record sheet iterations over the years. All of them served the player (or DM) well. In my experience, as D&D has evolved, character record sheets have become more and more complicated. I recall one character record sheet that I used, back in the dark days of AD&D 2nd Edition, that was an 11x17 sheet, folded over to create a 4-page character record booklet. Talk about excessive!

My renewed interest in playing OD&D, and Matt Finch's Swords & Wizardry, inspired me to create a 4x6 character card (in the Swords & Wizardry rule set, they recommend using a 3x5 file card to record your character). We have used the 4x6 card in the last four games of OD&D, and it seems to be well-received. I only had enough room on the card for the universal save, I could not fit the traditional 5 saves scores on this size of card. I also designed two 5x8 cards, for players who "graduate" to 3rd level, one for spellcasters (who need more room for spells) and one for non-spell-casters (more room for equipment on that card).

Honestly, I tried to take the advice in Swords & Wizardry, and use a 3x5 card, but I could not squeeze all the information onto a card that small! If anyone has succeeded in doing so, I would be most interested to see that.

Resource Cards: Test Run

Here is a picture of some resource cards that I printed, on 110 lb card-stock, as a test run to see how the resource cards would turn out.

The cards are roughly 1" x 1.25". There was enough room on those cards for a very short title, a picture of the item, and some text at the bottom.

While I am reasonably satisfied with the way they turned out, I can't help but think that I need to make the cards a touch larger, say 1.25" x 1.75", in order to allow for more text at the bottom.

Gems As Currency

I mentioned earlier that gems and jewelry are two resources I would like to model, in resource card form. I was reminded by a friend that there are some gems and or jewelry cards in the Paizo decks.

Fair enough. What I am after, though, are gems and jewelry cards that effectively act as currency in the D&D game. For those of you who remember the gems and jewelry tables from the original AD&D Dungeon Masters Guide, those had 50 or more specific gems, along with the range of gp values for each of those gems.

The jewelry table was somewhat less useful, but still, gave you some general descriptions of various pieces of jewelry, and the range of what those might be worth.

My goal is to model specific gems (ie. Diamonds, Rubies, Agate and so on) in card form, to reduce the "level of abstraction" that would otherwise be applied if you simply used cards labelled "gem", or "jewelry". Then, I want to apply certain values to those gems, so that the players carry around more gems and jewelry, as currency, rather than coins.

More About Resource Cards

I'm sure I've mentioned this before: I would love to simplify the D&D game by adding resource cards that the players can retain or surrender as their possessions ebb and flow.

Magic Realm uses a combination of chits (cardboard counters) and treasure cards to track each characters' possessions and abilities. These chits and cards are designed specifically for Magic Realm, and the effects of the treasure cards for that game are difficult to apply directly to D&D.

Each character in Magic Realm has a combination of 12 "chits": those represent the move, fight and magic abilites of that character. As an example of treasure cards in Magic Realm, there are 5 "gloves" treasures that essentially replace certain fight chits, making combat easier for a character that needs, uses, or could effectively use that fight chit. That Magic Realm treasure mechanic is somewhat difficult to port directly over to D&D, as the combat mechanic in D&D works quite differently.

While the Magic Realm treasure cards and chits themselves cannot be applied directly to D&D, the idea of items, abilities, and treasures can. In fact, D&D 4E has already done this, by producing the powers decks. Those are a little more complicated than I am looking for, but it demonstrates that the general principle can be applied quite easily.

Part of my difficulty in using existing equipment and magic item cards such as the Paizo offerings is that the range of cards is somewhat limited. While there are armor, treasure and equipment cards, there are other resources that are not represented by those cards.

You see, as I thought about the sorts of resources that could be modelled in card form, my list started to get quite long. In addition to the items available in the Paizo deck, I wanted to add such things as gems, jewelry, lodgings, clues, rumors, spells, hirelings, abilities, and languages. Some of these elements could be found in the Magic: The Gathering cardgame (I found lightning, fireball, sleep, and some other spells in M:TG), but other spells had no M:TG equivalent.

As I mentioned earlier, I came to the conclusion that I would have to design my own cards, if I wanted to cover the range of resources that I was considering, and if I wanted to have them at a size small enough that they would not take up an inordinate amount of space at the table.

My other consideration was cost. I wanted something that would be inexpensive, and easily replaceable, so that if a card was lost or soiled, the loss would be immaterial, and the card could be easily replaced.

I will post some pictures of the cards that I printed shortly.

Old School Monsters: Remorhaz

I've been waiting a long time for this baby.

The Remorhaz (pictured here), along with the Beholder, the Purple Worm, and a select group of other monsters, are classic and iconic D&D foes.

If I recall correctly, the Remorhaz' first in-game appearance was in the adventure "Rift of the Frost Giant Jarl", published some time around 1978. That adventure featured a battle against Frost Giants, who had been attacking human settlements, along with a suprise appearance by this nasty-looking opponent.

I recently purchased the collected Conan the Barbarian comic books (for my son!, really) and discovered a story about Remora, the ice worm, who Conan defeated. Hmmm, Remora, Remorhaz. Both are found in arctic regions. I wonder where the idea of the Remorhaz may have come from?

I am very pleased that WOTC finally created a mini for this monster. More importantly, I'm glad they got it right. The mini is very 1977 Monster Manual.

Whatever else you may say about WOTC, you can't take away the fact that they did a good job on this, and a few other, D&D minis.

Settlers of Catan

Honestly, I resisted playing this game as long as I could.

I have a large extended family. I'm talking large here. I have seven siblings, roughly 50 cousins, and probably just as many second cousins, not to mention 9 nieces and nephews. Easily half of my siblings, and a third of my cousins, play Settlers of Catan. They started playing roughly five years ago, and they often invited us to come and learn to play, but we usually begged off. I'm sure part of it was because they all seemed so well versed in the game, and we were afraid of being badly outmatched. But we also heard the post-mortems, with one person being mad at another for being cut-off, or for playing a particularly nasty card against them.

We were finally roped into a game, a couple of years ago, under false pretenses (we were invited over for dinner, and afterwards, the Settlers boardgame appeared on the table) but have enjoyed the game ever since.

I mention this game, not to review it (there are lots of good Settlers sites on the web) but to discuss the applicability of its rules and mechanics to the OD&D endgame.

I mentioned levels of abstraction earlier. One of my frustrations with the D&D endgame is the lack of structure around stronghold and empire-building. Once you have "plunked" down your stronghold, it is assumed that you will derive a certain amount of resources from the hexes you control, regardless of the productivity, resources available, or populace. There is also little in the way of rules to govern upkeep of your empire, from building and maintaining roads, providing improvements and benefits to your subjects, maintaining your army, interacting with other empires, and so on. Some of these can happen at the micro level, I suppose. But part of the attraction of the endgame was to control kingdoms, direct armies, and oversee the macro operations.

One of the interesting things about Settlers of Catan is that it both recognizes that different kinds of resources come from different kinds of terrain, but also recognizes that some areas are more productive than others. It would be interesting to add those sorts of considerations to the OD&D endgame.