41
Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion / Re: Are AD&D magic users implausibly weak?
« Last post by SHARK on March 28, 2024, 09:23:23 PM »Greetings!Shark, do you allow players to re-roll characters if they get lousy stats? Or are you in the “3d6, straight-down-the-line-and-you’ll-take-what-you-get-and-like-it” camp?
Yes, ForgottenF and I agree very much. In the "Wheelchair" thread, I made precisely the same argument. Yes, I am biased towards harsh, brutal reality, because I have actually done all of what amounts to as "Adventuring" in real life, professionally. While the Army and Navy are not as strict and demanding as the Marine Corps, historically, both of them have embraced and demanded a fairly rigorous uniform standard of physical abilities. Army Infantry demand everyone in the squad are able to perform basic physical challenges, running, climbing, swimming, digging, crawling, combat, running, and so on. The Navy--of course, not now with the fucking Woke Navy--but in the past, they too required regular physical challenges, carrying men and equipment up and down tight flights of stairwells, working with heavy tools, weapons and ammunition, and of course, being skilled in swimming. They also required a standard of athletics, likewise from every member of the crew, regardless of their particular "job".
That gets into my experience with the Marine Corps policy of "Every man a Rifleman." The Marines of course, likewise demand extremely vigorous physical abilities from everyone--again, regardless of their job or specialty. The standards within the Marine Infantry and Force Recon are much higher, and even more demanding. The Navy Seals, as you mentioned, yes, they too demand some of the highest and most brutal standards, again, for every member of the team.
This experience is all very relevant, because for many members of the military, at least much of the time, we do most everything that professional Adventurers in our games do.
The stupid, the fat, the weak, the slow--and certainly the fucking crippled--are not welcome, not acceptable, and not tolerated.
WHY?
Because people will unnecessarily DIE trying to protect the weak fucks, or get killed while coddling them.
Next, the MISSION. The success of the MISSION requires everyone is pulling their weight, and bringing their "A" game in every way. Minimum standards are simply a baseline--out in the field, in the real world, the Mission will always demand FAR MORE.
Your team simply must be able to all perform very well, and be ready and able to exceed expectations, or the Mission fails.
So, yeah, even in 1E D&D, Wizards are always very welcome, and an excellent asset--but they still must be able to do all the basic physical challenges and wilderness survival and movement required of everyone on the team.
There is no room for the weak, the fat, the slow, the stupid, or the crippled.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Greetings!
Good question, my friend! The truth is, it depends on the "Campaign Mode" I am running that particular group with. Normal Mode--which is 4D6 for each stat; or Hard Mode, which is 3D6 down the line. Of course, sometimes I will run the campaign one mode or the other, or allow the Players to select what they like. Some, after all, *prefer* the Hard Mode.
In recent campaigns, however, like my more recent group, I have been playing the Shadowdark rules, so, HARD MODE it is!
I can be lenient though. If they roll up a totally lame Character, yeah, reroll and get something decent. I don't let them reroll endlessly, seeking super stats--but simply to get that rough, decent range of stats. The driving point, being, yeah, Adventurers are unusual and somewhat elite. You have to be to even have a chance at surviving the challenges ahead. Being normal is ok, but let's face it--a large chunk of humanity are in fact, just walking corpses in a firefight. They are often mentally and physically entirely unsuited to fighting at the front. So, I am careful to supervise Players to make sure that they have rugged, functional characters. The weak, fat, crippled, and so on, well, again, let's be real. Those people stay back on the farm, or stay in the urban ghetto where they come from, or even a more well-off house. Those people stay near the temples, the schools, and markets, away from danger and real work.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Thanks for the response. It is always good to know your take on things.
I myself am kind of a softy when it comes to stats. I would like a character to have two good stats and to be able to place them so they can pick a class that they want to play. In the AD&D Player’s Handbook Gary Gygax recommends that a player character have at least a 15 in two stats since they represent heroic adventurers. Since I use the B/X rules and the plusses start at 13, I would be okay with two stats of at least 13 or better. My reasoning is that I can always bump up the challenge if the players are really “heroic” and cutting their way through hordes of enemies Conan style.
Regarding Magic-Users, I have no problem with a mage swinging a sword in a fight. They are still going to have crappy to-hit rolls in most systems. Not sure how I feel about them wearing heavy armor, or any armor for that matter. The whole “magic doesn’t work ‘cause metal armor” falls apart when the mage dons a suit of dragon scale armor or magical leather. I am forced to say “no” for the sake of game balance. I would rule if the mage wants to wear armor and fight well then they should branch off into fighter.
Greetings!
*Laughing* Yeah, Svenhelgrim, I am much the same way. After all, allowing Players to actually play the Class that they want, and be fairly decent at it, I tend to think is a good thing, you know? Having said that, yes, there is also great fun--and hilarity--in letting Players roll up totally random characters, letting the dice fall where they may, and see what you get. Personally, I LOVE that. It provides lots of hidden dynamics that are good for the game as a whole, if you see what I'm saying.
But, it does have its limitations and lessened appeal when you have a Player that is really jazzed and excited about playing "X" class. Telling them, "Well, better luck next time!" does not appeal to me very much, and certainly not likely for many Players. So, yeah, as the GM, I think being flexible, and somewhat generous at character creation is probably best, and the most fun.
I know some people like being harsh and uber-dicks say for example, to strangers you just met at a Con or at the game store, and may be more generous to a group of friends. Myself, though, yeah. You know. *Laughing* I'm nicer, and cool, and like everyone to have a good time. I wear the DM's Viking Hat, that is certain, but I'm not trying to compete with somehow showing how mean of a bastard DM I can be. I usually play with friends, so these people know me. Even at the game store, having a couple young girls, an older vet come up, maybe a young guy in high school or college, eager to get into an awesome campaign of D&D, yeah, I want them to have a good time, too.
That is just how I roll, my friend!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK