All That Glitters

 

Continuing the earlier thoughts about gold in classic D&D…

Over the years, one overall trend in my perspective on playing or running TTRPGS is an increasing deference to the Rules As Written (RAW). That’s not to say I never house rule any more, I do quite often, but it has become more selective and less of a go-to move. There was a time, and this blog contains ample evidence of it, that I would seize upon some game mechanic or suchlike and figure that my decades of experience meant I ‘knew better’ and could fix D&D. Shockingly, it wasn’t quite so simple.

As a result, I have seen more and more concepts and house rules and home-brew charts slip out of my metaphorical gaming Trapper Keeper and out of use when I plan or play a game. A “side effect” of this is watching other folks online work through similar thought processes about the same issues I was trying to “fix.” Often, I watch them arrive at a similar place to mine in real-time, as conversations evolve on chat servers and message-boards with other members of the online groups.

One common bugaboo that seems to come up over & over is coinage. Specifically in two main areas: gold vs silver as the standard denomination, and why coins weigh as much as they do (encumbrance). I’ve toyed with things like the “Silver Standard” (changing over to SP being the default coin) in the past. I’ve since come around to just using gold as in the books. I’ve had a similar progression of ideas regarding coin weight and size. I wanted to talk a bit about my rationales here and I’d like to address the second issue first (as it seems simplest): the matter of encumbrance.

In Basic/Expert D&D, 10 coins weighs a pound (16 oz., or around half a kilo). Now, most of imagining this might say “Whoa there! Those must be some HEFTY discs!” and you wouldn’t be wrong. I believe -and if I ever get the chance to hang out with Zeb Cook again, I hope I remember to ask him- that the numbers were chosen for ease of calculation over any concerns about realism.

That said, I get how it rankles some folks. 100 coins weighing ten pounds seems like it would make shopping around town quite exhausting. For those folks who decide to make the rate things like 20cn/lb or even more, as long as other weights for equipment, etc. are appropriately adjusted, go right ahead.

For myself, I tend more towards things like OSE’s basic encumbrance rules where the weight of most gear is ignored and a character’s movement is determined by how much (if any) armor they are wearing and whether they are carrying treasure. It makes things like equipment choices important, and takes into account the difficulties of hauling loot out of the dungeon without bogging down into every item’s individual weight. Obviously this requires ad hoc rulings on occasion. A recent example in a discussion group centered around carrying a ladder into the dungeon and what it would weigh. My suggestion was to treat it like having treasure in hand (an extra load) without having to get into debates on ‘how heavy is a 10’ wooden ladder’?

The caveat I would make is that D&D coins should be markedly heavier than modern coins, now whether that’s because a modern coins are less dense (the US Quarter hasn’t had silver in it since before I was born), or because the fantasy coins are just bigger, the fact remains if the money is supposed to contain the valuable ores in question, it’s going to be made of dense metals instead of modern alloys. Make them heavy enough that hauling a bunch out of the dungeon is at least a bit of a chore.

The other issue that is frequently brought up “the silver standard” or some variation of it. I should make it clear that I am talking about folks changing D&D’s gold piece default via a house rule, not about separate games with a silver standard baked-in from square one. In a nutshell, this is house ruling that silver is the default currency instead of gold, so prices in the equipment lists are in SP instead of GP. Most, but not all, versions of this house rule also make 1SP=1XP.

Again, I understand the reasoning. I’ve had similar ideas myself. Different people have posited different defenses of the silver standard house rule over the years, but as far as I can see, it boils down to complaints about “realism.” The argument tends to go along the lines of “10 gold coins weighs a pound, that means there are literally HUNDREDS OF POUNDS of gold in that chest. That’s nuts! There isn’t enough gold in the world for there to be so much treasure like that lying around! If there was, then gold would be worthless!” Or words to that effect. Fair enough, I suppose. But let me offer a few points in defense of why I use the gold standard as is in the rules.

Firstly, it’s easier to not change a rule than to change it. It’s how the game was designed, it’s how all the adventures and supplements use it, so it’s less headache for me to just leave it alone.

Secondly, the game is designed around exploring dungeons to find treasure. Getting past the traps and monsters to that chest of loot is literally and figuratively the players’ reward. The game mechanics of the treasure are irrelevant to the emotional satisfaction (aka “Fun”) the players get from their success. One of the ways I can make that better for them is in describing the scene well, and gold is just more evocative of wealth than silver. It’s just cooler looking. Look how ubiquitous it is in popular culture. Pirates’ chests are full of gold! The dragon doesn’t sit on a pile of silver!

Thirdly, Dungeons and Dragons was not created to emulate anything remotely like a real-world economy. Some editions, settings, and supplements have taken whacks at it, but originally no. It’s a fantasy game. Also for what it’s worth, it’s unlikely a fantasy/medieval gold coin is very pure. It could easily be 10K or less. Besides, all money is fake. It’s an agreed upon delusion that lets economies happen, so as long as folks agree that one “gold” coin can buy X amount, then it’s all good.

Lastly, the dragon sitting on the hoard is realistic, but what the coins are made of is too far??

Finally, let me just remind folks I’m talking about the games that I run. Other GMs’ mileage may vary, but for me, chasing after some standard of simulationism just leads to diminishing returns on the enjoyment of the game.

A Subdued Reaction

 

As I mentioned in the previous post, dragon subdual rules are an interesting little nugget buried amid the monster listings which rarely comes up in my games, but after talking about dragons in general, I felt it deserved a closer look.

Essentially, PCs can choose to beat a dragon up instead of killing it. Damaging spells and ranged weapons cannot be used to subdue -though I might allow thrown rocks, but not sling stones or bullets. Rather, blunt weapons like clubs or maces are used. A sword can be turned to hit with the “flat of the blade” for similar results. The battered creature, being intelligent enough to understand that the party could have killed it, but they chose not to. Therefore, to save its skin, the dragon surrenders.

The “subdued” beast doesn’t suddenly feel affection for the PCs. It is a prisoner. It will try to escape or kill its captors if it sees a reasonable chance. By the book, such a creature cannot be kept for any length of time and must be sold off as soon as reasonably possible. Players could see tens of thousands of gold for a live, subdued dragon sale (up to1k/hp). The AD&D (1st edition) rules in the Monster Manual for subduing dragons and how subdual damage works are far more complex (big surprise!) but follow the same general concepts.

So to start with, why have these rules at all? I can’t speak with authority on what the gang in Lake Geneva were thinking, but I’m guessing that some player wanted to try and capture a dragon for one reason or another and a set of rules was worked up to cover the situation. It would seem the DM that came up with this ruling wasn’t wild about a pet dragon sticking with the party, so he stipulated the selling of the creature was necessary. Given that you pretty much have to get up close and in melee with the beast to subdue it, and that your non-lethal damage does NOT reduce how many points of damage their breath weapon does, it seems a pretty fair level of difficulty for the players to pull it off.

So if you can’t keep Ol’ Scaly to ride around like you’re on Pern, and you would have gotten the hoard anyway if you’d just killed it, why go to the trouble? I can think of three possible reasons:

1) The dragon knows something or can do something for the PCs that they don’t know/cant’t do themselves.

2) The dragon serves a role in the larger world and killing it might cause downstream effects the PCs wish to avoid, but they still want the loot or to discourage the dragon from doing something. Maybe it was raiding a nearby town’s livestock, but the dragon’s presence keeps other monsters from overrunning the region. In that case, selling it off might not work, but I imagine releasing the creature once the PCs’ goals are met could be a viable option.

3) Number-crunching PCs. Defeating your average, BTB dragon has about 40hp and is worth about 1700-1800xp. An average hoard has a value of 50K. Referees may or may not award full XP for defeating a foe without killing it (I do) or for the gold earned by selling such a beast (again, I would) but selling the subdued dragon turns approximately 50,000gp (and XP) into up to 90,000! Definitely worth considering.

It’s probably fair to say that not every campaign has an economy that supports many “FS: Subdued Dragon. 1000gp/hp OBO” ads, but it IS something that is assumed to exist in your classic BX world, at least potentially. PCs might not be able to turn dragon resale into a sustainable business, but the idea that there’s one rich person out there that has a use for such a thing is not unheard of. Maybe a chaotic wizard has built his tower and wants to stick the dragon down in the dungeon below it as a guardian monster. He’ll send prisoners down for snacks and let it hoard some loot from any intruders it kills. A recently beat up and robbed dragon might actually be cool with an arrangement like that (at least for a time).

For myself, I’m not 100% on-board with the “must be sold” part of the language. While I wouldn’t make a subdued dragon into a “loyal beast” for the party, like a horse or some such (at least not without some powerful magic), I could see a situation where the players might make a deal with the dragon in exchange for letting it go later. Or where the buyer might have the cash, but it turns out he wants the dragon for alchemical ingredients and plans on killing it and cutting it up for parts. Some PCs might balk at such treatment of an intelligent being and want to find another solution. The dragon might be well-motivated to make such a deal to avoid the chopping block, or see this is an excuse to try and break free. There are many interesting situations to be created from such a scenario beyond a payday for the characters.

The PCs might not even be the ones with the dragon! Imagine them running into an NPC party on the road that’s hauling a bunch of dragon treasure back to town with a blue dragon in a cage. What if the NPC party is cool with the dragon being vivisected by some crazy mage as long as they get paid. What if the dragon could speak and begs the PCs for help (Remember Blues are neutral, not chaotic, in BX)? Now THAT could be a really interesting encounter!

I’ve rambled on a fair bit here, so I’ll wrap up. Is the inclusion of subdual rules sort of… weird? Maybe. But to me, it’s a weirdness very consistent with the Swords & Sorcery aspect of BX and fits really well into the assumed nature of BX settings. It’s also a rule that simply is not likely to come up terribly often. Not unless dragons are way more common in your games than mine. Not only do the PCs need to encounter a dragon either as part of a dungeon, randomly, or seeking one out on purpose; then they’d need to decide to forgo most spells and ranged attacks, then they’d need to defeat it with nonlethal damage, and THEN they need to get it someplace with a buyer to sell it to. If the party doesn’t have a buyer lined up ahead of time, what do you do with the dragon while you are asking around town? Granted, the party could realize quite a windfall from this, both in wealth and XP, so be prepared for the fallout from that. Most parties that could pull this off are probably far enough from low levels that it won’t disrupt things TOO much for each of them to gain 15-20K xp and similar amounts of treasure. Frankly, the boost to their reputations might be a bigger deal depending on how the society in your game views such things.

It’s a complicated enough endeavor that I wouldn’t spend a lot of time or energy worrying about the rules being balanced or more detailed or not. Chances are if your players are about to try subduing a dragon, you’ll have some heads up to review the rules and make your choices. For myself, I think the rules as-is are a pretty good springboard for this kind of situation to get introduced into a campaign. If dragons are at all a big deal in your setting, subduing a dragon and the aftermath of it could easily give you fodder for the next several sessions. 

Dragons in a BX World

The game is called Dungeons and DRAGONS, after all.

Fantasy games and fiction have sort of placed the dragon as the quintessential boss monster. It’s the big fight with the big payoff. Examples abound with Smaug’s hoard, Fafnir in Norse Mythology, countless adventure modules, multiple video games, and so forth.

Dragons also have a reputation for puissance. They are strong, they are tough, they breath death upon their enemies, and they can fly. Some are even spell-casters. Scary stuff, yeah?

So why aren’t dragons tougher in BX?

The biggest, baddest, actual dragon* is the Gold. They have the most HD, best AC, do the most damage, and can always speak and cast spells. They are also the only Lawful dragon, and therefore less likely to be hostile (though it’s certainly still possible one might attack a party).

The truth is, dragons are not the scariest thing out there in a BX setting. If I were a PC, I’d rather face a dragon than several standard monsters that are scarier IMO. Monsters such as: Salamanders (frost and fire), Bronze Golems, some Hydras, Purple Worms, and most of the things that can petrify you or drain levels. So the question becomes why do these creatures have such a reputation? Sure they are formidable, but they are actually not as lethal as most people seem to think.

I think that it boils down to a few things. First is the popular perception developed literally over centuries of stories and legends. Dragons occupy a particular, almost Jungian, place in our cultural psyche. For people who are likely to read this blog, this is even more so, because we are more likely to have read or seen more fantasy fiction and games that reinforce the trope.

The second is a little more to do with the way the game itself is designed. By the book in BX, you can encounter a dragon randomly in most wilderness hexes, albeit not a high chance. Even though they are included in the Basic rules, that has more to do with them being a possible “dungeon encounter,” as that is Moldvay’s focus (as opposed to wilderness in Cook). This means it’s not that unusual for characters to encounter a dragon at relatively low levels (at least when rolling randomly), and for most inexperienced PCs, if it comes to a fight, it won’t likely go well for them. Thus dragons gain an in-world reputation for lethality. They certainly can burninate the peasants’ thatched roof cottages with little trouble.

 

Which brings me to the breath weapon. Doing your current HP in damage where a Save only halves it? That’s a brutal opening move. Even if the damage goes down as they get hurt, they have that option 3x day, so even a smaller dragon, say an average 6HD white, might dole out 50-60 points of damage to multiple foes over a few rounds. That will wipe out most name level PCs, unless they make their saves (plural) and/or have magical protection (Resist Cold).

Third is intelligence. Dragons are played as smart, cunning predators that can live for centuries. Like intelligent undead (i.e. vampires), they have the time to plan their defenses well. Dragons are rarely without a plan or some sort of defenses in their lair. They will use smart tactics, or even magic, against their foes. This can make them far scarier than a dumb beast with similar stats.

Loot is a big factor in their reputations as well. While it does not directly affect their lethality, dragons’ Treasure Type H is a sweet haul, as it should be. There are other, tougher, creatures out there that have worse loot, so I think the dragon hits the “sweet spot” of maximum reward for a lot, but not impossible amount, of effort. As such, characters are motivated to seek the creatures out and many of them fail.

So what does all this mean for the dragon’s role in a BX setting? Well, this can vary a lot depending on the kind of world you are running, but I see them as sort of like a dying race. They are ancient, but few in number. They are solitary, predatory, and territorial. They crave wealth but rarely spend it. Their thinking is not like a human beings. Their perspective is one of centuries, not years. They are savage in the sense that they are not part of a “civilization.” But they are intelligent and can plan. They can (often) speak and so will sometimes choose to converse instead of fight. While there are things out there bigger and badder than dragons, there is almost no person or creature out there that would face a dragon lightly.

Dragons are generally smart enough to steer clear of heavy populations. It knows it will eventually attract attention. Either because the easiest hunting in populated areas is the livestock, or rumors of its treasure will spread, Any people who do live near a dragon are probably fairly isolated as well. They may see it somewhere between a predator, like a lion or shark, and a local nature spirit, like a river god. It may have been there forever, but rarely involved itself with people. There have been enough encounters to have given it a dangerous reputation, though.

I believe, and this really is just my opinion, that the fact that dragons aren’t actually so much “on paper” speaks to the massive opportunities they present in a campaign. They occupy such an interesting, almost unique, niche in the world that DMs can find a lot of interesting fodder for their games there. Most of the fun happens outside the combat rounds anyway. Even if the PCs just fight and kill the creature, that hoard might lead to a scramble to claim the wealth. Maybe five armies won’t show up for a normal sized hoard, but local bandits, a corrupt Bürgermeister? Who knows? 

In other editions of the game, dragons can be far, FAR more dangerous, even godlike in their powers. There's nothing wrong with that, but I think it's sort of fun that the dragons here are more integrated into the world. They're rare, but known. I like to imagine that it's sort of like certain wildlife in the real world. To someone that lives near the Florida Everglades, seeing a large gator is hardly unheard of, but it's still noteworthy. And if someone from Ohio comes to visit, they'll probably be more amazed when that gator crawls across the grass than the locals, but it's not like they didn't know alligators existed!

 *I’ve written before about “dragon-kin” like sea dragons and dragon turtles. For this post’s purposes, I’m sticking to the ones on page B26: White, Black, Green, Blue, Red, and Gold.

 

PS: While this isn’t directly related to this rant, I should mention that dragons in BX (and some other editions) can be subdued. This is where the dragon is reduced to zero hit points “non-lethally” and surrenders. I think this deserves its own post, as it is a really wild rule, but the fact that you can theoretically capture a dragon is an interesting facet of their role in BX worlds.