Is this true?

Here's a variant that seems to be saying it was true in 3rd edition.

See my sig.

Quote from: Age of Fable;543183

Is this true?

Here's a variant that seems to be saying it was true in 3rd edition.

It's false.

(1) The Domestic Cat can be found page 22 of the Monster Manual 2. It's not core BTB AD&D, but supplemental material, depending on who you ask.

(2) The rear claws of the cat inflict 1-2 damage. The Magic User rolls 1d4 for starting hit points, but he also may have a Constitution above 14 granting him extra hit points per level (that's the first caveat). So a MU without exceptional Constitution has a 50% chance of starting with 1 or 2 hit points (second caveat). IF he has 1 starting hit point (25% chance without an exceptional Constitution score, if you've been following), THEN he falls unconscious* when the cat hits him with its rear paws (see 4) and wins intiative (see 5). IF he starts with 2 hit points instead (50% chance without an exceptional Constitution), he has THEN a 50% chance of falling unconscious* if he is hit (see 4) and the cat wins initiative (see 5).

(3) The front claws inflict 1 point of damage. The probabilities are kicking in only with a 25% chance, IF the MU again doesn't have an exceptional Constitution to begin with (1 starting hit point rolled at 1st level),  not accounting for the actual die rolls involved to hit and initiative (see 4 and 5).

(4) All these probabilities actually do not account the part where the Cat has to *hit* first, which further reduce the actual overall probability of having your MU getting killed by a Domestic Cat's attack by another 50% (the Cat needs to roll 11 or better on a d20 to hit).

(5) All this does not account for the initial initiative roll, whether there is Surprise to begin with, and so on.

* When you are dropped to 0 hit points and below, you are in fact not killed outright in AD&D. Page 82 of the DMG states:

QuoteZero Hit Points

When any creature is brought to 0 hit points (optionally as low as -3 hit points if from the same blow which brought the total to 0), it is  unconscious. In each of the next succeeding rounds 1 additional (negative) point will be lost until -10 is reached and the creature dies. Such loss and death are caused from bleeding, shock, convulsions, non-respiration, and similar causes. It ceases immediately on any round a friendly creature administers aid to the unconscious one. Aid consists of binding wounds, starting respiration, administering a draught (spirits, healing potion, etc.), or otherwise doing whatever is necessary to restore life.

Any character brought to 0 (or fewer) hit points and then revived will remain in a corna far 1-6 turns. Thereafter, he or she must rest for a full week, minimum. He or she will be incapable of any activity other than that necessary to move slowly to a place of rest and eat and sleep when there. The character cannot attack, defend, cast spells, use magic devices, carry burdens, run, study, research, or do anything else. This is true even if cure spells and/or healing potions are given to him or her, although if a heal spell is bestowed the prohibition no longer applies.

If any creature reaches a state of -6 or greater negative paints before being revived, this could indicate scarring or the loss of some member, if you so choose. For example, a character struck by a fireball and then treated when at -9 might have horrible scar tissue on exposed areas of flesh - hands, arms, neck, face.

Cat
HD: less than 1 HD  - HP 1-2
Attack per round : 2
Damage per attack: 1
AC : 6


Wizard
HD - 1
HP - 1-4
Attack per round : 1
Damage per attack: 1d6 (staff)
AC: 10

They have the same to hit on their combat tables so the Cat will hit the wizard 40% more often than the MU will hit the cat.

From memory a 1st level MU needs 15 to hit AC 6 in AD&D so average per round damage will be (3.5 x  0.3 ) = 1.05
A cat's needs an 11 to hit the MU on each attack so average damage per round will be  (1 x 0.5) + (1 x 0.5) = 1

So the MU is much better and he has a spell ... no contest.

PS only in one of Ben's Power games would a MU have a Con of more than 14. First INT then DEX then CHA then WIS then CON. Next he will be saying that the MU might have 18 STR and will get +1/+2 on to hit and Damage.

Quote from: jibbajibba;543190PS only in one of Ben's Power games would a MU have a Con of more than 14. First INT then DEX then CHA then WIS then CON. Next he will be saying that the MU might have 18 STR and will get +1/+2 on to hit and Damage.

Not really. Method I for creating ability scores per DMG is 4d6 drop lowest, arranged to taste. That's actually the baseline the game operates under. It is not a bad choice at all to put one of your secondary best scores in Constitution for a MU, especially for the extra hit points, but not only (System Shock and Resurrection Survival matter too). It may not be usual, but it certainly is a possible, viable choice for a character (The second best score of my AD&D MU is actually a 14 in Constitution).

Quote from: Benoist;543196Not really. Method I for creating ability scores per DMG is 4d6 drop lowest, arranged to taste. That's actually the baseline the game operates under. It is not a bad choice at all to put one of your secondary best scores in Constitution for a MU, especially for the extra hit points, but not only (System Shock and Resurrection Survival matter too). It may not be usual, but it certainly is a possible, viable choice for a character (The second best score of my AD&D MU is actually a 14 in Constitution).

Methods I-IV can all generate equally capable magic-users.

Moreover, a domestic cat is an "up to 1-1 HD creature".  A 1st level magic-user has a chance of having a shield (AC4) spell up, a ring of protection (if you're using "generating a party on a spur of the moment" rules in the back of the DMG), or the like.

It's inane BS from people whose opinions about AD&D matter this: > < much.

magic missile is an automatic hit, and an automatic 2hp damage, so the cat dies every time.  The MU either needs to win initiative, or have the cat miss, or have more hp than the cat can do in 1 round.

I'm not going to chart out the exact probability, but with those factors, I would posit that the MU will win about 80% of the time.

What if the cat had years of training, unlimited financial resources, and time to prepare the scene of the confrontation?  Like, say, if the magic-user killed both the cat's parents in an alley after seeing Zorro?  

Quote from: thedungeondelver;543198It's inane BS from people whose opinions about AD&D matter this: > < much.

It's also meant to be amusing, in a Murphy's Rules kind of way.

Quote from: VectorSigma;543204It's also meant to be amusing, in a Murphy's Rules kind of way.

Of course; that's right...I'd forgotten all about Murphy's Rules...I actually have the compiled version that cut off in the early '80s.

Now don't get me wrong, folks who try to take an amusing thing like that and extrapolate it out to mean "AD&D is broken!!1!" deserve derision.

Quote from: VectorSigma;543207Now don't get me wrong, folks who try to take an amusing thing like that and extrapolate it out to mean "AD&D is broken!!1!" deserve derision.

Just like people who say that AD&D encouraged on the fly rulings due to bad or broken game design deserve derision.

Man, you guys take this whole issue way too seriously. Of course a wizard can kill a housecat unless for some reason you have an insanely gimped wizard.

The thing is that D&D doesn't really model things that are weaker than humans precisely, so yeah, the cat statted up in the Monster Manual 2 (I think that's where it is) has got a pretty good shot against a 1st-level magic-user or commoner. (The things Benoist is citing in the magic-user's favor are more marginal than he makes them out to be, esp. counting on high constitution with random attributes).

3e does a better job of all that but it still isn't very precise. Watership Down is pretty much outside D&D's purview, is what it comes down to.

Quote from: Imp;543213(The things Benoist is citing in the magic-user's favor are more marginal than he makes them out to be, esp. counting on high constitution with random attributes).

Actually I did cite the possible exceptional Constitution of a magic user, but if you read the post you'll see it doesn't enter as a factor in any of the percentile chances I put in there. It is just one of the multiple caveats that clearly show this scenario does not have a "more than 50% chance" to succeed at all.