|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Jan 10, 2005 23:38:12 GMT -5
The stat increase is something i have went round and round about. As per the DMG, everyone gets stat increases and decreases due to ageing, but nothing was ever done for training increases aside from a misc magic item or two. Why would a Cavalier specifically be able to increase his stats up to %20 per level and not a Fighter or a Thief or any other character? It says in the UA this is due to the consant training a Cavalier will do when not adventuring. Is it assumed that all characters aside form the Cavalier blow off physical training when not adventuring? Is not Strength and Dexterity training something all classes could do, and then have it also reflect in thier Con and therefore get the +%2 to %20 increase every level? if given the option, I woould have every one of my magic-users and thieves out there Dex training every chance they had.
Sure EGG was going for the Elite of the Elite here, thats why the bonus. And to be honest the stat increase out of all the foibles of the Cavalier has probbaly caused the least arguments around the table. But i do think stat increase could be taken or left. The cavalier wont break without it. Same could be said about weapon of choice. Although I think weapon restrictions/of choice make a good trade off for the Cavalier.
The Cavalier is a powerful fighter, the weapon of choice limits them. The down side of course is if you dont incorporate weapon profeciency/specialization for Ftrs and Rngrs then they are left in the dust and the Ftr and Rngr are pushed aside a second class warriors (at best).
I think if you are going to use the Cavalier as is, you really need to use weapon spec. for Ftrs and Rngrs. Otherwise you have to take weapon spec. away from the Cav., The weapon of choice is still a viable option if you do this, they just dont get all the extra bonuses attached. BUt i would still toss them a bone in that of the Lance and what they can do with it. Besides a Cavalier in a dungeon hall that is 5'x10' is gonna be slaughtered if he insists on carrying that lance along and using it as a pike. Otherwise he is still a good fighter in nice armour but he doesnt make the Ranger and moreso the straight Fighter less desirable to play.
But what about those codes of honor and who and what a Cavalier MUST do in situation A, B, or C. Now those have caused some of the biggest arguments i have ever seen at the table and away from it. When i started playing the Cav, i accepted those as a foible of the class like a Paladin has to be LG. But i have heard the line "who the hell does gygax think he is telling me how to play my frickin character... no one is going to play my character by proxy from Lake Geneva!" in every argument over the Cavalier.
Jerry
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Jan 10, 2005 3:38:50 GMT -5
Overpowered is just one of my beefs. Mayeb its just me and my groups but i have yet to have a barbarian in a PC Party that didnt just overpower the rest of the group or simply not fit in. The only time I have had any luck whatsoever with the barbarian is when i was running a saide campaign for two buddies of mine. It was a Fafherd & the Grey Mouser type thing and it worked out ok.
One thing that i never could figure out is after the lengths that is gone to to say Barbarians HATE - LOATHE - DETEST Magic... by 5th level they can use ANY magical Armour, Weapon, or Potion! I mean come on. 2 levels of "ooooo magic is taboo, bad bad mojo" then bango its 2nd level and "uh hey Groo, forget the cheese dip... wheres that potion of strength!"
As for attack progression it had to change. Gary put that ball into motion when he released the Cavalier to Dragon Mag. Once you've introduced weapon specialization and more atks/lvl, something had to give by decree of munchkin land. If the Cavalier can do it why cant everyone else!
Now I love the Cavalier, when it was first released in Dragon I was taking a class on Mallory and since no one was interested in playing Pendragon... well connect the dots. I dont like that the Cav is a sublcass of FTR, although i understand the reasoning. I really dont like that Paladins are a sublcass of CAV, that makes zero sense to me.
I think all FTR types should use the same 1e attack progression with to hit/to dam bonuses applying for the specialization if its used.
BUT all of this really IMO isnt the root of the problems. The problems lays smack dab in the lap of the DM that lets players use 26 dice to roll each stat or just lets them fudge the numbers to fit. Paladins, cavaliers, and Barbarians are supposed to be uncommon, just this side of rare, based on their minimum scores. When these classes/subsclasses were introduced starting with the Paladin, it was never expected that EVERY party would have at least one of these characters. Sure, as a DM I can say ok, I would like to see a Cavalier in this campaign, so you missed it by 2 points, go ahead and bump the stat to minimum, maybe even two stats. But once this becomes expected then why even roll the dice? Just fill in the numbers and go.
Its like the magic item discussion. These things should be treated a extra special when it happens. Not a mandatory default because it guarantees better ac, or hp, atks. Still though unless the game is just so, the barbarian is not an option in my games and Paladins and Cavaliers must be straight rolled... or it just aint happening.
Jerry
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Aug 10, 2005 0:01:37 GMT -5
Pittsburg is same distance give or take 14 miles depending on if you come into the area via US400 or US54. as for the Con, it appears it is a go, most likely 3rd weekend of March (this may change by a weekend though)
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Jul 17, 2005 1:29:30 GMT -5
Jerry--- ..., but I noticed that you're in SE KS now---my wife and I will be moving to Wichita soon (she and Ethan by month-end, me by the end of October or so). You happen to be local? Unfortunatley Wichita is more Mid-south Central. i am about 4 hours/178 miles from there. maybe we can arrange something after i get back "on my feet" and you get settled in. Course if the guys in the guild are real lucky, there might be a Gorilla Con III in Pittsburg KS come Spring. Always chaffes the turd edition folks' butts to have a FUN old school game going on in thier midst.
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Jul 17, 2005 1:20:17 GMT -5
Adventuring for a living is not a simple walk in the park, Son. Good people die just as easily as the stoopid ones. But for us here good and smart folk we dont die near as ofen as those dumb adventurers out there running amok...
Now quit daydreaming about slaying dragons and saving princesses and get back to muckin out those stalls and don't forget to clean up around the hitchin posts. The Baron Hisself is on the road tonight and there is a good chance he will end up staying here....
And, he dont like sh!t on his boots!
*shakes head* *mumbles* kids these days...
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Jul 16, 2005 4:52:51 GMT -5
Hey Grodog, i am guessing your PSU is Penn State? My PSU is Pittsburg State (notice NO "H") Heh.
I just thought it owuld have/be funny if both our PSU's were the same and we sat at each others tables at out games on campus. Honestly most of the games we held i couldnt tell you WHO all was playing. Most weeks in those days were were starting to get upawards of 12-15 players per game. we definately only ran one character in those games unless absoultely necessary to run a 2nd.
our side games were normally 4-6 people and unless under specific request of the DM, we would run anywhere from 2-4 characters each. Ii think it did make for a better game with fewer people playing. Plus i really enjoyed the diversity of the levels amongst the PCs. I think we kinda lost something when we started playing more with 1 person - 1 PC (even if only 4 or 5 people playing)
J.
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Apr 19, 2005 15:24:26 GMT -5
lets see...
weapon vs armor weapon speed hand to hand (funny thing is every game i run these are intended to be inicluded then we get into a combat and i completely forget)
Oddly i will allow Psionics but it must be rolled in front of me and i usually limit the ability because IMO some of that stuff is way overpowering.
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Mar 28, 2005 12:34:43 GMT -5
Gads Its been too long since i combed thru the books.
i dont recall them being used as weapons but I seem to recall them not only being used for Turning but in a couple occassions... Spell Components?
although it may be something to look into further in the House Rules... I see potential for something along the lines of Holy Symbol/Relics weapons along the lines of the Holy Avenger sword. There could be something in the core that i have overlooked along these lines already that i have jsut missed... I wouldnt be surprised.
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Feb 20, 2005 3:36:28 GMT -5
Heh,
Great Observation and right on the mark IMO.
i can tolerate a schmuck if they do provide a level of humor.
Of course, if all they are is just a schmuck and a non-humor producing one at that.... well, its time for a grenade enema.
Jerry
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Feb 15, 2005 20:16:05 GMT -5
low or high, doesnt really matter to me anymore. I still love to take a 1st level goob and run him up thru the levels but after all these years my PC portfolio has enough characters to choose from regardless of the level range someone wants to start at. Granted its not over flowing but i have at least 3 or 4 characters in each of the 1-4, 5-8, 9-10, 11-14, 15-20 level ranges, all which have came up from a level 1 goob. I still dislike cold rolling any character to play that is over 5th level. Its like a kid being born at age 14 instead of of like normal. All the initial formative years are missed, even if you are good at comeing up with detailed back story.
Jerry
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on May 9, 2005 2:27:53 GMT -5
The instructions would be a nice addition. Yet another thing i have yet to get around to typing up.
I do a real easy edit and print for the charcter sheets. One can easily open the .chr file in notepad or wordpad or anyother editor and the only mods you need to make is to cut out the trailing ascii after the money info. Simply save it to a txt file and windows can quick print it from there. I also do the same for encounters i set up. Except i usually cut and paste them all together into one file with a bit of space between entries. That way you have room to track combat on the sheet as well.
It owuld be nice if there was a way to get it to print direct from the program, but considering the ease of editiing to get it to a Win Print stage.... i jst havnt worried about it.
And yes being able to customize the encounter tables is really helpful.
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Jan 25, 2005 15:59:27 GMT -5
They are for MS-DOS but will run on 98/ME and will also run on XP if the install directions are followed correctly.
Jerry
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Jan 25, 2005 8:06:56 GMT -5
I got these programs as soon as the came out years ago. They were the best on the block for the AD&D 1e DM back in the day. Matter of fact I still use them to this day. (yes even on XP) You can edit, add monsters and encounters including treasure types associated with encounters. You can also generate characters based on the PH only or with the PH plus the UA. It also has a treasure generator. Of course it has the obvious dice roller in each program. Both are avaialble for download at Knights-n-Knaves.com in the Gaming Downloads Section. I have talked to a number of my game company contacts and computer game contacts and as far as i can tell these old SSI products are now in the Public Domain, Freeware-Unsupported. If i am wrong i will remove them but for now, they are available. Jerry
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Jan 18, 2005 13:16:39 GMT -5
After further review, I realized I should have started this discussion in HomeBrew so... This topic has been moved to Homebrew AD&D by Jerry Mapes.
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Jan 12, 2005 17:33:21 GMT -5
Its not something out of nothing! EGG can be cryptic! As for the touch aspect, the reference in the description is "recipient". Who is and can be the recipient? Can you give something to yourself? Of course, but not all things are wanted I would say in most cases its more of "would he" than a "could/can he." I cant find anything yea or nay except that those spells that MUST be used on someone else and those spells the MUST be used in oneself are definate in not only description but in "name." (I.E. Polymorph Self, Polymorph Other) Looking at the AOEs most all that deal with touch or affecting one thing implicates that it can be used against human/humanoid. The DMG is specific where the Spell Caster ONLY can be the recipient in the AOE. But does this mean that if it doesnt say you can cast it on yourself then you cant? I would say no, this isnt the implication. EGG seemed to always make sure to specify when it had to be X and only X. The rest he left vague as a "you understood" that if if he didnt say X and only X then X could be A thru Z depending on the circumstance and how the surrounding context is defiined. The DMG and PH seems to read (define the context) that Creature can mean any human, humanoid, monster, or animal. Person is only Human or Humanoid. Monster is only non-human/non-humanoid. Animals can fall into Creature or Monster catagories. Taking this further a PC Magic-User can be Human or Humanoid and therfore also considered a Creature by the context definitions (see also Geas spell). So a DM could judge that ANY spell that specifically does not state that it can not be cast on oneself could be cast on oneself. Again we are back to would he? In case of Fly or Invisibility... sure. Fireball or Geas... doubtfull. Now... For casting on the fly.... whew! I am gonna have to do more reading. It seems contradictory. I have yet to be able to find where it defines just how much movement a magic-user can do when casting aside from that required by the spell. Obviously one would get no Dex for AC in the air as on the ground but beyond that I'm just not seeing much other than the texts you have pointed out. Jerry
|
|