Paths diverged (the future of D&D)

A few years back, I wrote about my long-term vision for D&D in this post. As I reimmerse myself in the game after some time away, and after having spent many, many hours reflecting on settings, homebrew vs. published worlds, and previous campaigns prior to launching with Phelan, Khadhras, and Ged, I finally feel a true framework for my future DM endeavors beginning to unfold.

For months (even years), I’ve been at odds with the ideas of building out my own world vs. giving up the massive investments I’ve made (and continue to make) in Forgotten Realms (and, to a lesser extent, Ravenloft). Though it’s early, I’ve started to bridge these opposing forces in the High Forest campaign, while also stirring the longevity cauldron by forging a path with Jason to further Zeb’s legacy. I don’t want these efforts to be mutually exclusive, nor do I want either of them to prevent me from executing on other D&D initiatives that I’ve placed on the backburner for so long.

In short, just because I’m actively working on a particular D&D project doesn’t mean that other campaigns should retire, will retire, aren’t “canon” within the space I run, or won’t be allowed to come to fruition. This isn’t a complex idea, but it’s something I’ve had difficulty believing and coming to terms with. Kicking off the latest 1:1 track with Zeb* has been an essential catalyst: our content is too good, too deep, too historied to not continue on with for as long as we want it to go. But neither should the greatness of Zeb’s story preclude other arcs from being played, nor other worlds from being developed for the long term.

The missing piece that I’ve talked about for years is a gritty, in-person AD&D game in the spirit of “halflings vs. ogres” (maybe even using Basic Fantasy!) that pulls hard on the simulationist strings. This would almost certainly not be in Realms, and when the time is right for such a game to begin, I’m not going to defer it because it would spell the end for Zeb, Phelan, Khadhras, or Ged... because it won’t.

Rather, what I see myself doing is having a few separate, ongoing DM tracks. They may not all move quickly, and each may wax and wane based on real-world happenings and where I’m most keen to invest at a given time. We’re all adults with families, jobs, and responsibilities, after all. In truth, I’ve already started down this road, but I think it’s important to disclaim it going forward, lest any players start to feel that their current campaign is in its death throes or that there won’t be additional opportunities to get involved in games I decide to run.

This post is little more than an introspective exercise for me to look back on later. When I think about D&D games that have been running for 40 years, the work of Erikson/Esslemont, Alexis Smolensk, and others, the value in history, consistency, richness, and depth is abundantly clear, and something I want to continue to strive for over time. It won’t be achieved by throwing away my last 20 years of DMing and starting from scratch, nor by failing to forge new paths into new endeavors and even new worlds for fear of losing all that's come before. The key is for it all to be interconnected in some way, even if subtle—as this is what will enable the web of time and space within and between campaigns to expand as the years go on.

* By the way, I know I wrote in the “Longevity” post that “If a PC dies based on dice rolls, I’m not going to intervene.” And, to be fair, I didn’t. The TPK happened and we moved on, started a new campaign arc with different characters. The party and campaign as we knew them were no more. In a high fantasy setting, though, with gods, magic, and other preternatural forces directly involved, I don’t feel in the wrong for having left a door open for Jason (or Sean, though he elected to close it). Zeb’s “rebirth” has come at great personal cost (both story and mechanical) and allows us to continue chronicling an epic character in an organic and nondisruptive way. Know that I didn’t take this decision lightly, and nothing short of the monumental set of circumstances surrounding these events would have allowed it to occur. If anyone believes otherwise, feel free to throw your current character in front of a raging orc horde and see what happens. :) 

XP awards for sessions 2-5

Sorry for the long delay in getting this posted. Not a ton of minutiae to review, but a couple key milestones worthy of acknowledging:

• Eluding the forest bear - 175
• Escorting “the three” to Aryen’s Hope - 1,000
• Wolf attack amid the barrows - 650
• News/company returned from the Deadwalk - 2,000

In total, 3,825 points divided three ways makes for 1,278 each, with Ged also receiving a 10% prime requisite bonus (128 additional points, 1,406 in total). Updated party totals:

• Khadhras - 1,553
• Phelan - 1,553
• Ged - 1,709

With these additions, Ged crosses the threshold for 2nd level and may ascend upon training for two dedicated (in-game) days. Even if we don’t end up playing soon, I didn’t want to let this go any longer.

XP awards for session 1

Here are XP awards for the inaugural session, since Bungo may be taking some time off and I’d like to ensure we have a clean division.

• Slaying the undead wolf - 100
• Story award for sending news back to Pelanor - 1,000

Initial party totals are as follows:

• Khadhras - 275
• Phelan - 275
• Ged - 303
• Bungo - 303

The sidebar is updated accordingly. Please keep in mind that these awards, while small, are only for one session, wherein much time was spent on introductions.

Looking ahead, and final XP totals for the Khedrun Valley

First-level characters. 0 XP. With as few as four meager hit points.

A single, well-placed hit could kill a party member outright. Zeb and Audric have become the stuff of legends. Level 6 may not have felt so high before, but now...

It may be hard to emotionally invest in these PCs, before any sessions have been played. I don’t expect anyone to. It takes time. Effort. Luck.

Survival.

But, for those who reach 2nd, 3rd level, and beyond... the attachment will start to form. The work you’ve put in will matter. The story will matter. The characters will matter. Taking a night off from being on your game will mean risking the loss of everything. Most of us have been there, know what it’s like. Every decision is important. Don’t hinge it all on a roll of the dice.

Read this post.

...and have fun. May it be a truly epic ride.

* * *

With all that said, I’ll soon retire the previous campaign’s XP totals from the sidebar. Here they are, one last time, for posterity:

• Vonn - 13,088
• Audric - 34,389
• Zeb - 3,000/56,869
• Selben (h) - 18,451
• Lom (h) - 10,730
• Zargon (d) - 14,789

Game on!

Should we talk about the weather?

I wrote this post before we played the last session. Seems a shame not to publish it, even though things took an unexpected turn.

This is an awesome book. I recently dug out my copy to help preparing for sessions again:

AD&D Wilderness Survival Guide

While technically a 1e resource, much of the content in the WSG is edition-agnostic... not to mention that many of the bits that aren’t, like encumbrance, are direct predecessors to out-of-the-box rules in 2e. All in all, the WSG provides tons mechanical depth to the perils and nuances of overland adventuring. This is the stuff that turns drab, handwavy periods of travel into immersive, challenging, and memorable game experiences.

Some of the rules dealing with things like being under- or overdressed in extreme temperatures, though useful, are only occasionally relevant, but the weather system presented in the WSG is pretty much always of benefit. Without going into detail on how exactly it works, here’s a look at the weather forecast I used it to predetermine for session #45. This is based on both the general climate (the Frozenfar is considered subarctic), terrain (hills surrounding the mine, forest surrounding Fireshear itself), and time of year (late summer into early fall):

• Day 1: 50 degrees Fahrenheit (high) to 30 degrees Fahrenheit (low); no wind or precipitation. Even during the ninth month of the year, we’re hitting a point below freezing at night. This is something the miners didn’t have to deal with in midsummer; the party, however, finds itself in a situation where at least one campfire is needed, heightening the chances of being noticed from afar (though it’s pretty likely that any local denizens already know they’re here).
• Day 2: 60º F high, 40º F low; no wind and trace levels of rain. With the brief cold spell passing, a more comfortable temperature sets in, though overnight campfires are still desirable for optimal sleep. Small amounts of rain are at worst a nuisance, barely worth mentioning.
• Day 3: 65º F high, 45º F low; light breeze and slightly more rainfall. On the third day, the temperature rises a bit more, but this is offset by more substantial rain with wind. Characters may be less than comfortable if traveling back to Fireshear, or inclined to take shelter within the cave if still working at the mine.
• Day 4: 60º F high, 40º F low; moderate wind. Temperatures remain reasonably comfortable, but the wind is enough to disrupt missile fire at anything but close range (i.e., penalties to attack rolls will be assessed, based on distance).
• Day 5: 35º F high, 15º F low; heavy winds and moderate precipitation... that means SNOW! The first snowfall of the season occurs on an uncharacteristically cold day. Such are the risks of adventuring in the Frozenfar, even at the onset of autumn. If the party is travelling this day, they’ll need to find ways to stay warm and protected from the elements.
• Day 6: 50º F high, 30º F low; moderate rain. The flash snowstorm abates as temperatures rise back toward the seasonal norm. Flurries turn to rain, creating slippery and treacherous travelling conditions in the hills outside Fireshear. Hopefully the party is safely back home by this point.

This is as far out as I calculated the weather for this session, but it’s easy to see how, depending on timing, the party’s return journey to Fireshear could be impacted. Precipitation is also of particular importance as it relates to the ecosystem of the mountain cave: rainwater flows into the base of the chasm from outside, replacing the stagnant water and washing away rot.

While I’ve always taken weather into account throughout the campaign, the party’s arrival in the Frozenfar escalated the need to track it more closely. The PCs did ride through a snowstorm between Griffon’s Nest and Longsaddle, but that was during the dead of winter, further south. Hopefully this provides some insight on what they can expect in the weeks to come...

XP awards for session 44

I'm going to go ahead and allocate XP for last session now. There's only one award to distribute, but it's a doozy...

The demon from the chasm is worth a massive 22,000 XP. Sure didn't feel like it thanks to Zeb's protection from evil, 10-ft radius spell, but well-earned nonetheless. The award is divided as follows:

• PCs/NPCs (4, including Bonie) - 4,400 each
• Henchmen (2) - 2,200 each

Updated totals, then, are as follows:

• Vonn - 13,088
• Audric - 34,389
• Zeb - 3,000/56,869
• Selben (h) - 18,451
• Lom (h) - 10,730

The only level-up goes to Vonn, though Audric, Zeb, and Selben are inching close. No training outside Fireshear, so Vonn will remain at 3rd level in terms of ability until the party makes its return.

All about bows (in 2e)

I’ve really had a few things mixed up regarding bows over the years. The intention has always been to adjudicate missile fire “by the book,” so I’ll begin honoring these immediately:

• Only longbows can fire sheaf arrows; short bows are limited to using flight arrows. (Note that this was already previously discussed here.)
  
• Longbows and short bows can be strung for a “heavier pull” to allow characters with high Strength scores to apply their modifiers to attack and damage rolls; these bows don’t cost more than normal bows unless they intend to enable bonuses for exceptional Strength (18/01 and higher).
• Composite bows work the same as regular bows in terms of pull; what’s different is their design, range, and speed factor.
• There’s no penalty to hit when firing into melee; possible recipients (including allies) are prorated with respect to size and the target is determined randomly (the attack roll still needs to be high enough to hit the target’s AC).

For those wanting to read the relevant passages, review the following sections in the 2e PH:

• Bows (Equipment chapter, p. 73)
• Modifiers to the Attack Roll (Combat chapter, p. 90)
• Ability Modifiers in Missile Combat (Combat chapter, p. 99)
• Firing into a Melee (Combat chapter, p. 99)

Rules Index

This post is a collection of various house rules and rulings we’ve employed over the years. The intention is to update with additions/changes whenever needed.

* The posts/rulings below are intended to be a guide for when similar situations/questions arise in our current game. Note that some of these were issued several years ago, for different campaigns (and in some cases, different rule systems). I reserve the right to alter or update them, if warranted.

 

House Rules

• Ability scores
• 4d6-drop-lowest, arrange to taste; up to two times, you may permanently discard these scores to roll a new set
• Hit points
• Max hp are awarded at 1st level
• For all subsequent levels, any 1s on hit point dice may be rerolled
• Proficiencies
• Both weapon and nonweapon proficiencies are in use going forward
• Critical hits
• An attack roll of natural 20 automatically deals max damage
• Training
• To level up, a PC must train for a number of days equal to the new level
• No monetary cost or mentor requirement is currently enforced

Class Abilities

• Favored enemy (ranger)
• Backstab (thief)
• Turn undead (cleric)
• Crusader (custom character class)

Combat

• AD&D 2e combat basics
• Missile fire
• Sheaf arrows
• Mounted combat
• Rulings on coup de gras permissibility based on various spells

Magic/Spells

• Starting spells for bards
• Learning new spells from captured spellbooks
• Scrolls
• Specific spell rulings
• Detect evil
• Find familiar
• Summon swarm

Miscellaneous

• Staying awake under duress
• Death’s door for NPCs and monsters

AD&D 2e Dungeon Musings YouTube Video

I shared this to our campaign Discord, but wanted to post here as well. This video, while lengthy, is an excellent overview of AD&D 2e in terms of the type of game it facilitates and reasons for potentially running it over newer/modern systems, while still remaining reasonably objective. Highly recommended for those returning to 2e after some time off:

 

XP awards for sessions 40-43

Four sessions into the fifth campaign arc, XP awards are due. Party allotment:

• Slaying Berigaard, his minions, and plundering his treasure - 10,000
• Opening the traveler's chamber - 5,000
• Disengaging from Sinjun's party - 1,000

These 16,000 points are divided into full shares (3,200 XP) for each PC and Bonie, and half shares (1,600 XP) for Lom and Selben. 

There's also the matter of the displacer beasts, which needs to be handled separately (thanks, Sean), since Lom was being played as a PC and certain party members were not present. For this encounter, Lom, Vonn, and Zeb each receive 488 XP (this also accounts for shares deducted for Sinjun's party). Finally, Zeb's 10% prime requisite bonus is also reflected in the updated party totals below:

• Vonn - 8,688
• Audric - 29,989
• Zeb - 3,000/52,029
• Selben (h) - 16,251
• Lom (h) - 8,530

No new are levels gained from these awards, but Lom inches precariously close to 4th, at which point he'll be only a level behind Audric.

The necromancer's spellbook

The full contents of Berigaard's spellbook are listed below. PCs that have not cast read magic on a spell's specific pages still need to do so prior to attempting to learn the spell:

* = necromancy

• 1st level
• Armor
• Chill touch*
• Color spray
• Detect magic
• Detect undead
• Magic missile
• Mount
• Read magic
• Tenser’s floating disk
• 2nd level
• Knock
• Levitate
• Shatter
• Spectral hand*
• 3rd level
• Feign death*
• Slow
• Vampiric touch*
• 4th level
• Contagion*
• Enervation*
• 5th level
• Animate dead*

Other Findings

Amid the necromancer's scattered parchments, Audric uncovers a few items of note. The first is a writ of passage aboard a ship named Winnower, from Fireshear to Neverwinter, dated early fall in the Year of Silent Steel (1254 DR) and signed by one Captain Elchesir Stormantle.

The second is a letter, unsigned and undated:

To Their Families, Next of Kin, or to Whom it may otherwise Concern:

I regret to inform that two Mercenaries from Fireshear, one Jartheld Olsbane and one Sulndor Mettlehorn, have Sadly Perished at the hands of Deadly Orcs of the Frozenfar whilst under my employ. Rest assured that these brave men Died with Honor, and that Their Remains have been consumed upon a Grand Pyre, nobly befitting their Station. Dispatch return correspondence, if desired, to my Trusted Apprentice.

Your Most Solemn and Humble Servant,

(Vonn recognizes these names as the hired guards who aided Vonn and Berigaard in slaying the frost giant, one year prior.)

The third is a pair of bound volumes, yellowed and weathered from age. One is a book titled Song and Prose of the Frozenfar, a collection of regional poetry and folklore; the other, Cold Ebony, appears to be a study of negative energy, astral projection, and related cosmic and dimensional topics.

XP awards for sessions 36-39

The following are the XP awards granted for the closure of the fourth campaign arc:

• Delivering news of Corin Redbeard to the Undercity - 2,500
• Duel with Rale Cotchen - 1,000
• Accepting Milter to Dagger's Deep - 500
• Goblins in the forest - 100
• Successfully boarding Moonmaiden - 1,000
• Navigating the ruins of Illusk and breaching the Sea of Swords - 15,000
• Payment received from Dame Azurris - 1,200

This amounts to 21,300 points, with full shares of 7,100 to each of Audric and Zeb, and half-shares of 3,550 to Lom and Selben. Zargon, having fallen in combat, reaps no final reward for his contributions. Updated party totals:

• Audric - 26,789
• Zeb - 3,000/47,972
• Selben (h) - 14,651
• Lom (h) - 6,442

The only level gained belongs to Lom, who advances from 2nd to 3rd. Training can be assumed to be conducted immediately upon reaching port in Fireshear. It can also be assumed that payment of 1,200 gold is issued to the party upon arrival, in the form of platinum coin rolls.

Mirabar Run

Over the course of the day and through normal rumormongering at The Rusty Sword, the party becomes aware of a three-masted caravel being constructed by a makeshift shipbuilding company along the north bank of the River Mirar, inside city limits. The endeavor is significant because, in addition to river travel, the vessel is said to be equipped for seafaring, even reinforced to test treacherous waters where seasonal ice floes are abundant.

Hearsay is that, when ready for launch, a bolstered crew will cast off downriver and attempt to press through and beyond the ruins of Illusk, which various orc hordes are known to yet occupy. If successful, the ship’s cargo of furs, armaments, and winter goods will be trafficked to the mining town of Fireshear, north along the coast amid the Frozenfar.

A highly dangerous but potentially highly profitable undertaking, the prospective voyage has been monikered “Mirabar Run”; until recently, it was not believed that the capital to fund such an effort would be achievable, but the combined investments of a conglomerate of local merchants have turned what may once have been little more than a lofty vision much closer to reality.

With the landbound expedition to Icewind Dale nearly stocked and set for imminent departure, tavern-banter has become aglow with talk of Mirabar Run, and the aftereffects that success (or failure) might yield.

XP awards for sessions 34-35, revised

This post is a reissue of the XP initially awarded here. In discussions with the group since we played earlier this week, there are two issues I’d like to correct in favor of the party.

The first is that XP was not originally awarded for the magical longsword and military pick. These were intentionally omitted because they were discovered under circumstances where “there was no real danger associated with obtaining them.” In truth, that shouldn’t really matter: the party still plundered them and we’ve also had at least once previous instance where XP was awarded for items acquired in non-combat situations.

The second is that the XP total was divided evenly among all party members prior to halving the henchman’s share, instead of dividing the total into shares that would consume the entire allotment. This, too, was intentional, and I’ve actually been divvying XP this way for some time. Philosophically, it equates to a henchman requiring two of the group’s points to earn a single XP; the math is also much simpler.

After further research and deliberation, I’ve decided to revert to the approach where the entire XP allotment is used, with no “XP waste.” Either method can be argued as canon, but I’d rather err on the side of the party. Further, I don’t feel that the “divide first, then halve” method scales fairly with multiple henchmen. For example, in a situation where 6,000 XP is earned by a party of four PCs and two henchmen, the “no waste” method awards 1,200 XP to each PC and 600 XP to each henchman (1,200 + 1,200 + 1,200 + 1,200 + 600 + 600 = 6,000), however the “divide first” method gives only 1,000 XP to each PC and 500 XP to each henchman, with an effective “loss” of 1,000 XP (1,000 + 1,000 + 1,000 + 1,000 + 500 + 500 = 5,000) - an entire share!

This definitely feels wrong and, as we now have more than one henchman in the party, I can’t rightly defend the use of the “divide first” method going forward.

In light of these changes, the total XP earned for the last two sessions is 11,500 (10,000 for the behir and 1,500 for treasure plundered). This is divided into sevenths, with two parts going to each of Zargon, Audric, and Zeb, and one part going to Lom. Individual allotments:

• Audric - 3,286
• Zeb - 3,614
• Zargon - 3,286
• Lom (h) - 1,642

Revised updated totals:

• Audric - 19,689
• Zeb - 3,000/40,162
• Zargon - 14,789
• Selben (h) - 11,101
• Lom (h) - 2,892

In addition to Audric and Lom, Zeb also advances, becoming the first PC in the campaign to reach level 6! Hopefully this is agreeable to everyone. While I'm still considering options to improve the way the XP is allocated in our game, I'll plan to continue using this approach until any change is made official.

XP awards for sessions 34-35

Edit: this post is no longer current. See the revised version here.

The entirety of the XP award for the last two sessions is vested in the slaying of the behir in the catacomb below Dagger’s Deep. The sum is a whopping 10,000 points, divided five ways (Selben was not present) and with Lom’s share halved due to henchmen status. Updated totals:

• Audric - 18,403
• Zeb - 3,000/38,748
• Zargon - 13,503
• Selben (h) - 11,101
• Lom (h) - 2,250

Lom inches over the minimum needed for 2nd level, while Audric crests the hill of reattaining level 5 after a long journey back from his setback against the wights. Level ups have already been administered and hit points rolled, so everyone should be good to go next time we play!

Short bows and arrow types

Henceforth, I’ll be correcting a rules error that we’ve been making for several years in allowing “sheaf arrows” to be fired from short bows. Despite the 2e PH not explicitly stating (to my knowledge) that short bows are limited to using “flight arrows” only, I think we have enough suggestive data points to know that it’s not intended for short bows to deal 1d8 damage:

• The “Missile Weapon Ranges” table on p. 69 lists both arrow types under “Longbow,” but no specific type under “Short bow,” implying that either the arrow ranges for short bows are indistinguishable or that only one type of arrow can be used.
• The “Bows” section on p. 73 states that “Arrows for long bows of all types are divided between light-weight flight arrows and heavier sheaf arrows. Flight arrows have longer ranges and are normally used in hunting. Sheaf arrows have a stronger metal head but a reduced range. They are often used in times of war.” It makes no distinction with regards to usable arrow types for short bows.
• It simply doesn’t make mechanical sense for short bows to be able to deal 1d8 damage in the context of the available weapons in the PH.

From this point forward, characters and NPCs using short bows will deal only 1d6 damage per hit. Any preexisting inventory of sheaf arrows on record sheets may be freely converted to flight arrows. Short bows can be “traded in” for longbows in Mirabar or Dagger’s Deep for an “upgrade cost” of 45 gp (the cost difference between the weapons in the PH). Note that certain classes are permitted to use short bows only (the Thief class, in particular), but I don’t believe that any current PCs are subject to this restriction.

XP awards for sessions 31-33

I’d like to make sure that XP is shored up prior to heading into tomorrow’s session, when the full party is set to reconvene. There are three sessions to cover; the first of these was the foray into the hidden cellar below Dagger’s Deep, where the party discovered the parchment and bloodstone (among other effects), worth 1,000 XP for each primary PC and half that amount (500 XP) to Selben.

The venture to Mirabar and subsequent investigative work there garners a nominal award of 500 XP to each of Audric, Selben, and Zargon, with half that amount (250 XP) awarded to Lom.

The orc-hunting expedition at Post South reaps a lofty 2,000 XP to each of Audric and Selben, and 1,000 XP to Lom. This is fairly generous awards, by the book, but in addition to enemies slain, reflects both relationships forged amid the outpost and knowledge gained of the area west of Mirabar.

In total, the awards for the three sessions sum to:

• Audric - 3,500
• Zeb - 1,000
• Zargon - 1,500
• Selben (h) - 3,000
• Lom (h) - 1,250

Adding in Zeb’s 10% prime requisite bonus, the updated party totals now stand thus:

• Audric - 16,403
• Zeb - 3,000/36,548
• Zargon - 11,503
• Selben (h) - 11,101
• Lom (h) - 1,250

This puts Selben solidly over the threshold for level 4 (for which he’ll need to train), a fitting reward for Jason’s choice to elevate him to a full PC for a short stretch and surviving the excursion from Orcdoom. Audric is also now reasonably close to reattaining 5th level.

Recovered Items

Not a ton to review on this front, but I’ll remind briefly that the bloodstone radiated a faint magical aura, while the parchment did not. The coinage found among the orcs was minimal, but a 120 gp bounty is awarded to the party by the city of Mirabar upon their return.

AD&D 2e combat

It feels high time to get a revision of this post up to overview how combat works in our AD&D 2e campaign. Here are the key points/rules I want to highlight:

• Surprise. Determined by rolling 1d10 for each side (as deemed necessary by the DM) at the start of an encounter; a result of 1-3 means that each opponent gets to make a free round of attacks (using melee weapons, missile weapons, or magic items, but not spells) against the surprised party. Various modifiers can be applied, for example a +2 bonus to account for a cat familiar’s keen senses around a camp at night.
• Initiative. Determined by rolling 1d10 for each side at the start of each combat round. Lower roll wins, with the results indicating the count on which each side will begin its actions during the round.
• Melee and missile attacks occur on the initiative count. Combatants with multiple weapon attacks (e.g., missile weapons with a high ROF and Fighters with weapon specialization) take any subsequent attacks at the end of the round; monsters with multiple natural attacks (such as claw/claw/bite) and PCs/NPCs with two-weapon fighting make all of their attacks immediately. (Note that, if we used weapon speed, the speed factor would be added to the initiative count for each combatant.)
• Movement and charge attacks begin on the initiative count and consume a number of “segments” necessary to complete the associated movement.
• Spellcasting begins on the initiative count and completes after a number of segments equal to the spell’s casting time. If the caster is damaged while the spell is in the process of being cast, the caster’s concentration is lost and the spell is thwarted.
• Other single-round combat actions include turning undead, lightning a torch, drinking a potion, binding wounds, etc. (also see the 2e PH, p 93).

Other/special combat actions and modifiers:

• Attacking from higher ground grants a -1 bonus to initiative and a +1 bonus to attack rolls.
• Charging allows an attacker to increase his or her movement by 50% and make a single attack against an opponent at +2 to hit. In return, the defender gains a -2 bonus to initiative and the attacker suffers a -1 penalty to armor class in addition to losing his or her Dexterity bonus to AC for the round.
• A critical hit occurs when a combatant rolls a “natural” 20 on an attack roll. In these cases, maximum damage is awarded without rolling.
• Firing into melee results in a -4 penalty to attack rolls to account for the difficulty of avoiding one’s allies. (Note that this is not, in fact, “by the book” for 2e. Per the PH, p. 99, ranged combatants firing into melee do not take a penalty, however targets are chosen at random and being hit by friendly fire is possible. This rule probably warrants further discussion.) This post provides details on how firing into a melee actually works.
• Melee combatants may select specific targets for their attacks when the ability to distinguish one opponent from all others is practical (this is up to the DM’s discretion). When it’s not, the opponent being attacked is determined at random. 
• Withdrawing allows a combatant to disengage from melee at 1/3 speed. Fleeing allows the combatant to run from melee at full speed but draws a free attack from each engaged opponent. (In either case, the combatant exiting the melee may be pursued, unless each pursuer is explicitly blocked off by an ally.)
• Invisible opponents can be attacked with a -4 penalty to hit, as long as the attacker is aware of the opponent.
• Prone opponents can be attacked with a +4 bonus to hit. Only sleeping, held, or fully immobilized opponents can be slain automatically.
• Cover and concealment make it more difficult to hit an opponent with missile fire. Cover (or “hard cover”) means that an obstacle (like a wall or boulder) is blocking the intended target; concealment (“soft cover”) means that the target is obscured by entities (such as fog or foliage) that hide the intended target. (See the 2e PH, p. 99 for details and modifiers.)
• A called shot may be made against a target in an attempt to achieve a specific result, such as forcing an opponent to drop an item. Called shots are made with a -4 penalty to hit, and a +1 penalty to initiative.

In closing, while the above points cover the majority of combat situations in our games, I highly recommend that each player read the full “Combat” chapter in the 2e PH (pp. 89-106) prior to our next session.

Statistical differences between rolling methods

Sean and I have been discussing rolling methods for ability scores, particularly in the context of PCs vs. henchmen. Consider the two following methods for generating a set of abilities (sourced from the 2e PH, p. 13):

• Method II. Roll 3d6 twice and take the higher of the two values.
• Method V. Roll 4d6, discard the lowest roll, and add up the other three.

For player characters, I've long employed Method V (4d6 drop lowest) with a caveat that the player can roll up to three sets; if the player discards one set to roll another, the discarded set cannot be used. This gives the player the ability to discard an underwhelming set or swing for the fences to try to attain a great set, but also adds an element of risk, especially if the third and final set (which must be accepted) turns out to be poor.

For most NPCs and hirelings, I employ Method II, which tends to generate more averages sets. I don't use any re-roll caveat for NPCs. They get what they get.

Because, in our campaign, henchmen have the ability to replace fallen PCs over the long-term, we want to make sure we're in agreement on the rolling method to use. Most AD&D players intuitively know that Method V is more likely to generate high scores (15+) than Method II, but what if we evaluate the methods more deeply? Let's say, for example, that we're looking to create a ranger, which requires two scores of 14 or higher and two additional scores of 13 or higher.

I wrote a quick app to generate random sets of ability scores using both methods. Scores within each set are arranged from highest to lowest, with sets that qualify for the ranger class marked with a letter r. Here are results for ten sets of scores for each method:

Method II results (3d6 twice, take higher):
  16  14  13  13  11  11  (r)
  16  13  12  12  10   8
  15  14  13  11   9   8
  16  15  14  12  11  11
  14  14  13  13  12  11  (r)
  13  11  11  11   9   5
  15  15  15  13  12   8  (r)
  15  14  14  12  12   8
  13  12  12  11  10   8
  16  14  14  13  12  11  (r)

Method V results (4d6 drop lowest):
  15  13  13  12  12  12
  14  14  12  10  10   8
  16  13  12  12   9   4
  17  15  13  11  11   7
  14  14  12   9   9   8
  14  14  12  11   8   7
  17  14  13  12  11   7
  15  12  11  10   9   8
  16  14  13  13  10  10  (r)
  15  15  14  13  10   8  (r)

Four rangers for Method II, only two for Method V. This are very small samples sizes, so let's run them again to observe the variance:

Method II results (3d6 twice, take higher):
  13  12  11  11  11   6
  14  13  13  12  12  12
  14  13  13  12  12  11
  17  16  12  11  10   9
  13  13  13  12  11  10
  15  15  12  10   9   8
  17  16  12  11   9   8
  15  14  14  10   9   9
  16  16  15  15  14   9  (r)
  17  13  13  13  12  12

Method V results (4d6 drop lowest):
  15  12  11  11  10   9
  15  14  13  12  12   7
  15  13  11  11  11   9
  16  14  12  11  10   8
  14  14  13  13  12  12  (r)
  15  15  14  13  11  10  (r)
  17  14  14  14  13  11  (r)
  16  16  15  12  10   8
  15  15  14  13  12   5  (r)
  18  14  13  12   9   9

This time, one ranger for Method II, four rangers for Method V (an opposite result). Obviously, we need more data. I'll have the application roll 100 sets for each method and take the averages (rounded down to whole numbers):

Method II averages:
  15  13  12  11  10   9

Method V averages:
  15  14  12  11  10   8

These are actually really close; in fact, the total number of ability points is the same with both methods. Through another few runs, I was able to verify that these exact averages still hold even with a very high (10,000) number of sets.

But the averages don't tell the full story. Again, we know from intuition that there's going to be tangible variance between the methods. If it's not in the total number of points, then where?

For starters, we know that, in order to get stuck with a score of 3 using Method II, we need to roll six 1s in a row. That means 6^6, or one in 46,656 scores. To get equally unlucky with Method V, you only need to roll four straight 1s, or 6^4, which is one in 1,296 scores.

That's a major difference: you're almost 40 times more likely to end up with a score of 3 using Method V (the 4d6 method) compared with Method II (the 3d6-twice method).

Let's see what the distribution of scores is over ten sets of scores using each rolling method:

Method II totals:
   3s:  0
   4s:  0
   5s:  0
   6s:  0
   7s:  0
   8s:  2
   9s:  6
  10s:  4
  11s:  5
  12s:  12
  13s:  7
  14s:  12
  15s:  6
  16s:  6
  17s:  0
  18s:  0

Method V totals:
   3s:  0
   4s:  0
   5s:  0
   6s:  2
   7s:  2
   8s:  2
   9s:  6
  10s:  3
  11s:  3
  12s:  12
  13s:  9
  14s:  5
  15s:  10
  16s:  3
  17s:  3
  18s:  0

That looks reasonable: fewer high but also fewer low scores when using Method II. How about for 1,000 sets?

Method II totals:
   3s:  0
   4s:  2
   5s:  11
   6s:  36
   7s:  101
   8s:  257
   9s:  424
  10s:  629
  11s:  839
  12s:  979
  13s:  926
  14s:  727
  15s:  513
  16s:  313
  17s:  184
  18s:  59

Method V totals:
   3s:  3
   4s:  25
   5s:  51
   6s:  99
   7s:  194
   8s:  269
   9s:  451
  10s:  585
  11s:  697
  12s:  794
  13s:  740
  14s:  737
  15s:  586
  16s:  430
  17s:  240
  18s:  99

Now we're starting to see the numbers at work. A thousand sets contain 6,000 individual scores; we have three scores of 3 using Method V, and none using Method II. Given that we were expecting only one in 46,656 scores with Method II but about one in 1,296 scores with Method V to result in a lowly 3, these results look pretty solid, though our sample sizes are still small enough that we're hitting a fair degree of variance.

Here are the totals for 100,000 sets:

Method II totals:
   3s:  15
   4s:  184
   5s:  1056
   6s:  3819
   7s:  10642
   8s:  24747
   9s:  43524
  10s:  65439
  11s:  84711
  12s:  94523
  13s:  92145
  14s:  72943
  15s:  51490
  16s:  32525
  17s:  16626
  18s:  5611

Method V totals:
   3s:  473
   4s:  1917
   5s:  4722
   6s:  9581
   7s:  17370
   8s:  29011
   9s:  41925
  10s:  56347
  11s:  68252
  12s:  77520
  13s:  79661
  14s:  74389
  15s:  60690
  16s:  43464
  17s:  25012
  18s:  9666

For Method II, fifteen out of 600,000 scores ended up as 3, or one in 40,000, which is very close to the one in 46,656 ratio that we expect to normalize to over the long term. For Method V, we had 473 scores of 3, which is about one in 1,268... extremely close to the normalized ratio of one in 1,296.

If we add up all the scores of 7 or lower, Method II only generated 15,716 while Method V produced a whopping 34,063. If we add up all the scores of 15 or higher, Method II gave us 106,252 while Method V resulted in 138,832.

The takeaways are that you're more than twice as likely to get bad scores (7 or lower) with the 4d6 method, but only about 30% more likely to get high scores (15 and above). Method V, however, is almost twice as likely to generate very high scores (17 or 18), while Method II is far more likely to hit in the average range of 10 through 14.

Finally, here's a plot graph of the 100,000 set results, which makes everything nice and clear:

Click to enlarge

Though Sean and I still haven't decided exactly how to handle scores for a new henchmen, the above data definitely provides the right ammunition to help us make the best decision for our campaign. As an extra bonus, here are score distributions for two additional rolling methods described in the PH, along with an additional graph that charts all four methods.

• Method I. Roll 3d6 for each score.
• Method IV. Roll 3d6 twelve times, and take the six highest values.

Here are the side-by-side averages of all four methods:

Method II averages:
  15  13  12  11  10   9

Method V averages:
  15  14  12  11  10   8

Method I averages:
  14  12  11   9   8   6

Method IV averages:
  15  13  12  12  11  10

...along with the score distributions of the two new methods:

Method I totals:
   3s:  2817
   4s:  8353
   5s:  16620
   6s:  27915
   7s:  41657
   8s:  58653
   9s:  68882
  10s:  74966
  11s:  74945
  12s:  69277
  13s:  58329
  14s:  41804
  15s:  27916
  16s:  16701
  17s:  8340
  18s:  2825

Method IV totals:
   3s:  0
   4s:  0
   5s:  0
   6s:  1
   7s:  129
   8s:  2063
   9s:  14860
  10s:  50573
  11s:  98940
  12s:  123988
  13s:  114935
  14s:  83276
  15s:  55540
  16s:  33591
  17s:  16596
  18s:  5508

...and the final graph depicting all four methods:

Click to enlarge

(If you made it to the end of this post, congratulations!)

XP awards for sessions 29-30

The XP award for the past two sessions is wholly attributed to the party's contributions in the battle against the barbarian invaders; as such, Zargon receives a full share, even though Bill wasn't present for the return journey downriver.

The total award, less amounts reserved for Bonie and other NPCs, is 10,000, which divides to 2,500 XP per PC and 1,250 XP for Selben. Updated totals:

• Audric - 12,903
• Zeb - 3,000/35,448
• Zargon - 10,003
• Selben (h) - 8,101

Zargon has attained 5th level, and can advance upon completion of five dedicated days of training.

Recovered Items

Further, following are the noteworthy possessions recovered from the Stormlord, whose throat was torn out by Zeb. (It can be assumed that the other barbarians' and ogres' gear is mundane, and will be allocated to Dagger's Deep.)

• Large, claw-ended maul (functions as a bastard sword, magical)
• Chainmail, marked from use and mended in several places (non-magical)
• Black-iron medallion, hung from an iron chain and bearing a depiction of lightning bolts (non-magical)
• Leather pouch, carrying an assortment of small gemstones and a handful of nominal coins (non-magical)