Last in Line: Initiative Optional rules

 Hello Again!

Sorry I haven't been posting a lot lately. Is it sufficient to just say "2020" as a reason? I think that's fair.

We've already discussed different aspects of BX's initiative system, but I wanted to talk a bit about a couple of related optional rules.

The first is the rule about pole arms going last in initiative order. Now, this is originally presented in Moldvay as part of the variable weapon damage rules on B27, which are themselves optional. The default rule is that all PCs' weapons do 1d6 damage (B25). Several items on the chart are marked as two-handed which means A) no shield, and B) automatically losing initiative.

No shield seems reasonable, but always going last? This can seem a bit harsh, but it makes a measure of sense within the abstract nature of BX combat. Weapons like two-handed swords or polearms are unwieldy and take an extra moment or two to bring to bear. Sure, an initiative penalty could work as well, but also remember that the default rule is one initiative roll for each side of the fight (not paired/individual initiative), so simply having the guy with the halberd go last is a simple conceit for smoother play. But keep in mind that he doesn't go at the end of his side's turn, he "loses" the initiative, meaning at the end of the round. Except if fighting zombies, of course! (B44)

The other optional rule is regarding crossbows. In addition to going at the end of the round (2H), Cook (X4) presents the rule that they fire only every other round. That may seem quite slow, but speaking as someone who owns a modern crossbow, every other round is actually pretty generous. I imagine even more so for a medieval tech-level example of the weapon.

So why would anyone ever use these weapons if they carry all these penalties? Well, mechanically, they generally do more damage than other weapons, or in the crossbow's case, have greater range. Spears and pole arms can also be set vs a charge (X27) for x2 damage. There are also a host of potential house-rules that can make such items more appealing. Some example include giving certain weapons "reach" to attack from more than 5' away, or letting a crossbow be carried loaded & nocked so that the first shot gets an initiative bonus.

There can also be in-gameworld reasons for using some items over others. Historically, a sword would have cost a LOT more than a poleaxe. Not to mention whether there are local weaponsmiths capable of forging particular armaments. Certain weapons might be restricted to certain social castes. Maybe the characters' culture simply never developed certain weapons? Maybe certain classes. The list goes on.

I don't expect my observations to result in too many fighter PCs giving up "sword & board" for a glaive, but I do hope it helps make some sense of these rules. 

Moldvay Musings XXI: Surprise!

Surprise is one of those rules that I often see misapplied or simply done wrong. I admit I've not always done it correctly in the heat of the moment, but I honestly don't know why some people have trouble with it Perhaps it's because of its actual simplicity. In any case, let's take a look at it, shall we?

Like many rules in games like BX, the surprise mechanic is fairly abstract and is used to cover a lot of different scenarios. Being surprised is not just standing agog at the fact that there are six goblins with spears in front of you. Neither is it necessarily a "jump scare" type ambush.

Being surprised can be as simple as just being caught flat-footed; or a moment's inattention that gave the opposition the chance to act first. Maybe the door took an extra shove to open or the floor was a bit uneven. The point is you're playing a bit of catch-up for a few seconds.

Once the DM makes the call that surprise is at least possible for one or both groups, I think there are two main areas that throw some people off mechanically: The order of events and the nature of the dice rolls themselves.

Surprise isn't rolled until step 5 of the turn order. By that time, the party has already entered the area. Narratively speaking, people would expect to hear about the encounter right at that point. The thing to remember is that all this is more or less happening at once.

"If surprise is possible, the DM should roll 1d6 for each side in the encounter. A result of 1 or 2 for either side indicates that the side is surprised (unless given otherwise in the monster description)."

The stumbling block here seem to be that the die roll for "your" side is actually based on your opponent, not you (the PCs). It's the chance you are surprised, not of you doing the surprising. This becomes apparent when dealing with creatures whose surprise roll is not the default 1-2. For example, a bugbear surprises on a 1-3. That means the chance of PCs being surprised goes up.I've had to remind people of this at the table more than once.

I'd like to point out that surprise can actually be a big help to PCs. With smart play, the PCs will have many opportunities to be the surprise as opposed to the surprised. Things like sneaking thieves reconnoitering, careful listening, and detection spells give a party a decent to get the drop on things. It's important to pay attention to the text on B23. It points out that surprise is not always possible, but that doesn't mean it can't be possible for one side and not the other. Honestly, in my experience, PCs being surprised actually doesn't come up all that often.

Despite this, I frequently hear complaints from players that surprise is just for screwing the PCs over: "How can we be surprised by the goblins?! We're in a dungeon! We're ALWAYS expecting an attack!" and so forth.

If this sounds familiar, perhaps consistently applying these rules in a way that doesn't slow down play can smooth things out a bit and let you enjoy the added richness they can give to your encounters. 

Curious Objects: Wand of Negation

The wand of negation is a fun one for a couple of reasons. 1) It doesn't show up very often (at least in my games), so unusual items can lend themselves to create unusual situations. 2) It is an item specifically designed to counter other items. Like a less powerful rod of cancellation, but more specific in nature (and with more charges). 3) It is one of the few examples of pre-declaring actions in initiative.

The item's description is fairly brief, so here it is from Cook (X50) in its entirety:

"A charge from this wand will cancel the effect of one other wand or staff for one round. The user chooses the wand or staff to be negated and the decision to use it must be announced before rolling initiative."

I suppose this could be read as negating an effect that has already taken place, but that doesn't really make sense. So many effects from wands and the like are instantaneous. How do you negate a fireball that has already gone off? It seems more sensible that the wand would suppress the use of the opposing item for that round, which ties nicely in with the initiative qualifier.

So it is, in effect, a highly specialized dispel magic. A MU or elf with one of these could be a very effective countermeasure to an enemy spellcaster. If you recall from my previously referenced post on initiative, the idea that a caster must pre-declare casting a spell before initiative is rolled. An enemy with higher initiative could attack the caster and "disrupt" the spell before it goes off. Mind you, there is nothing in the rules about pre-declaring using a wand or staff, though.

I wrote the example below as much to show a spellcasting type making themselves useful in a fight without actual casting as I did to show the item itself in action. I find it helps me to make up these sort of in-game situations to visualize how different spells or items might be utilized.

So imagine a scenario where a party which includes an MU who has this wand, but is out of spells for the day encounters a hostile bunch Orcus-worshippers including an chaotic priest wielding a staff of command. 

1st Round: The cleric tries to remove the enemy spellcaster from the board by using the staff on the MU. He makes his save, but can see that the cleric has some bad juju at his disposal and gets the wand ready.

2nd Round: The MU's player pre-declares he is targeting the staff and rolls well for initiative. When the cleric starts to point with the staff at the next foe. FZZT! Charge wasted. The cleric sees what is happening and does not want to waste his precious charges, so he puts up the staff and grabs his unholy symbol. The MU sees this and, since the wand only works vs other wands (or staves), he draws a dagger. Not really playing to his strengths, but it's better than nothing.

3rd Round: The cleric, being an NPC, doesn't "declare" he is casting a spell, but the DM tells the players that the priest is holding up his symbol and starting to chant. The MU beats him on the initiative again and flings his dagger at him. It hits, but only for 1 point of damage. That's enough to disrupt the light spell the cleric was trying in order to blind the MU. By the book, the cleric also loses the spell as if it were cast. By this time the other PCs have smacked down several of the minions and closed with the priest and he's got more on his mind than just the MU now.

Moldvay Musings XV: I Do Declare!

In an earlier post, I touched on situations that require "pre-declaring" actions in BX. That is to say, before initiative is rolled. This is an interesting artifact of older D&D, as I do not think it is used much in "modern" RPGs. Honestly, we've hardly used it ourselves in my group and I don't even recall using it back in the day. Maybe as my beard grays my gray matter is getting a bit tired.

There are a couple of reasons I think this idea has fallen out of favor. For one, it feels a bit more like a legacy mechanic from D&D's wargame roots than something that was consciously added to the early game; kind of like the whole idea of phases to one's actions (Melee, Ranged, etc.). Newer editions by contrast simply tell the player how much of which kinds of actions they can complete on their turn.

The second reason is that pre-declaring can feel like it is making it harder for players to react tactically in an encounter. If I already declared I was casting Bless, then does that mean I can't switch to Cure Light Wounds when I see our fighter get wounded?

These are valid concerns and they do affect the nature of game play, but before dismissing them out of hand, let's look at some of the benefits of this rule.

1. What's good for the goose. Enemy/NPC/Monster spell casters should need to declare as well. Perhaps as a DM you don't want to tell the party exactly which spell is being flung at them, but the PCs should at least be able to see that the pesky goblin shaman is starting to chant and wave his arms around. This lets the characters A) know who the enemy spell casters are, and B) plan accordingly.
2. Spell interruption as a tactic. It's true that would royally suck as a low level magic user if your only spell of the day got fizzled because some kobold scored one lousy point of damage from a sling stone. Of course, as mentioned in the first point, that means the PCs can do the same thing to the bad guys (assuming the initiative die is behaving). This can give weaker PCs the opportunity to have a greater effect on the combat, especially if they have a good DEX or other initiative bonuses (like halflings). Also, it gives the aforementioned MU that's tapped out on spells something to do: Just chuck a dagger at any enemy casters and Presto! Old School Counterspell! This also gives players a chance to do something about that incoming Fireball before they're stuck saving for half damage. 
3. Making magic more than artillery. If your spell casters are vulnerable in this way, it makes the successful use of any spell more useful. When you look at the spell lists in BX, not that many spells are really designed for use in the middle of the fight. Even with a very generous interpretation of what constitutes a "combat" spell (eg healing magic, protection spells, etc.), it only works out to approximately 50%. If a magic-user or cleric's spells aren't as "useful" in a fight, then it gives the players (and the DM) the opportunity to explore some of the other cool magical stuff these characters can do. (For ideas, might I recommend perusing the series of Random Spell Assessments on this very blog!). This also plays into what I've described as a more BX feel to magic, with a more distinctive "flavor" to magic and spell casting.

Personally, I could see going either way with this rule (ignoring or implementing). On the one hand, I know that players generally are loathe to be limited by arbitrary mechanics, but on the other, I do think that this could bring an interesting wrinkle to the game. Some house rules I might consider if I were to try it could include things like: 

• An ability check (WIS for clerics, INT for MU/Elves) to retain the failed spell. ie it fails, but you don't forget the spell for the day.
• Letting PCs or monsters shield their side's spell caster to grant them an AC/cover bonus until the spell goes off.

Moldvay Musings XI: Initiative

In a recent game, the PCs had a wilderness encounter with a nest of four giant scorpions. Fortunately for the characters, they were mounted and were able to turn things into a running battle where they literally ran the monsters  in circles as they peppered them with arrows. The monsters could catch up with the PCs each round, but not also attack.

By the end,the fight had become a simple matter of tedious attrition. After the session, I thought about it and how it might have been handled differently. Not to punish the players for using tactics, but to keep it more exciting. (Though honestly, they should have just run away). I chided myself a little for not applying circumstantial modifiers for things like terrain slowing them or giving cover from missile fire to the monsters (they were in a relatively dense forest). The main thing I found though was something in the rules as written that I have always been aware of, but seem to have difficulty remembering for reasons uncertain: In BX, initiative is supposed to be re-rolled every round.

At some point in our group’s history with various editions and systems, we’ve fallen out of that habit and simply rolled for initiative at the start of an encounter. We use individual initiative as opposed to group, so at first I was thinking it was just a good way to reduce excess die rolling, but it turns out that rolling every round matters more than I first realized.

For example, in the above circumstances the kiting players wouldn’t have been able to rely on going first each round (they’d rolled well) to evade the monsters again & again. One low initiative and the scorpions would do their thing. This ties into the rules for Defensive Movement, i.e. Fighting Withdrawal and Retreat (B24). To use these types of movement, one must declare intent to do so before rolling the round’s initiative. This increases the risks, but does keep things fresher. Keep in mind the rule applies to monsters as well as PCs.

The other circumstance where an action is “pre-declared” in BX is spell casting. This one always catches me out because the rule is listed in Cook, not Moldvay. A character wishing to cast a spell that round must A) say so, and B) declare which spell before the initiative order is rolled. Again, upping the tension in the fight. I usually haven’t applied this rule in the past because I felt like it weakened already fragile spellcasters, but I am considering reintroducing it.

For a more detailed discussion on some of these and other mechanics, I highly recommend reading the “An Interpretation of Basic D&D” post over at the Basic Dungeons and Dragons blog.