RMA: Lycanthropes (werewolf)

Once again, Halloween fast approaches. It is easily my favorite holiday of the year. This reminded me of my post last year about classic monster movies. 

It then occurred to me that I have never done a Random Monster Assessment (RMA) about the classic lycanthropes. I have discussed the Devil Swine, but he's not a typical example of this grouping of monsters. So without further ado, I am diving into a series of lycanthrope RMAs starting with the classic of all classics, the werewolf.

OGWW!

First off, let's get the stats out of the way, shall we?

Werewolf (from Moldvay)
AC: 5 (9 in human form)
HD: 4
Move: 180' (60')
Att: 1 bite
Dmg: 2d4
No. App: 1d6 (2d6)
Save: F4
Morale: 8
AL: C

At first it doesn't appear that intimidating. Its armor class (in were-form) isn't too bad and it has a low morale. Four hit dice means it isn't dropping in one shot, but it isn't exactly a dragon, either. Of course, what makes the werewolf and other lycanthropes interesting (and scary) as foes are the devils in the details.

It's common knowledge that werewolves are not harmed by normal weapons. It requires magic (weapons or spells) or, of course, silver to damage them. Silvered weapons aren't too hard to come by in your typical BX setting, heck they're on the standard equipment lists along with things like wolfsbane (we'll get to that), but not every weapon has an argent version. By the book, only daggers and arrows are available this way. I have had players do things like melt down silver pieces into sling bullets and coat crossbow bolt tips with the metal, but I usually draw the line at things like silvered swords and the like. It's not that the metal is so expensive, it's that the process won't hold that much of an edge. I did once see a player at a con have his cleric use a silver candelabra as an impromptu blunt weapon, though. Magic weapons and "battle" spells are pretty obvious, as that +2 Axe or Lightning Bolt spell is going to work against most any critter you use it against.

Aconitum napellus, or Wolfsbane, is an interesting bit of folklore that was added to the monster listings. I've discussed it in more detail in the previously linked blog post, but the idea that one can drive the were away without killing it, coupled with a werewolf's low morale lends itself nicely to the idea of the creature being driven away by the superstitious peasantry and remaining at large for an extended period; perhaps over several nights, months, or years?

Moving on. All lycanthropes can summon their mundane counterparts. So werewolves can summon regular wolves, wereboars normal boars, etc. Having 1 or 2 wolves show up to the fight a few rounds later might knock some PCs off balance a bit.

Werewolves are particularly nasty foes because they tend to run in packs. In groups of five or more, there is an "alpha" with an extra HD and a damage bonus plus the normal summoned wolves to pad the ranks. 2-12 werewolves with 1-2 wolves each means a lot of fangs running around underneath a full moon.

And their hair was perfect! 

Lastly, I should mention the disease of lycanthropy itself. There are a few interesting things about it. First of all, there is no save! If a character takes more than half their hit points in a fight with a were-creature, they are infected. Secondly, it only fully manifests in humans. It just flat-out kills demi-humans! Granted, humans or otherwise have a little time before the disease takes full effect (one way or the other) and can seek out an 11th+ level cleric to cure them of the disease. This is doubly interesting because A) Cure Disease is a third level spell, which a cleric would have access to by sixth level. B) There isn't anything specific about an eleventh level cleric's abilities that seem to jibe with this power. No access to new spell levels and they were already name level. So why 11th? The only thing about this particular level cleric that I see is that is where they reach the highest tier on the Turn Undead table (11+) and can automatically Destroy any undead up to Vampires. I would say it's because lycanthropy is a magical disease, infecting one via a magical creature, but mummies' rotting disease is curable by the spell. I expect it was probably a case of where the Expert rules were assumed to be going to have something for it when Basic was released, but things got tweaked after the first book was published.

The Monster Mash

  

The other night I stumbled upon the fact that iTunes had several classic horror/monster movies at very low prices. I picked up what many consider the unholy trinity of OG Halloween films: Lugosi's Dracula (1931), Karloff's Frankenstein (1931), and Chaney's Wolfman (1941).

It had been decades since I had seen any of these and could hardly pass up the chance to add them to my library. All three films are short (under 90 minutes each), so I watched them over the last couple of nights. There have been so many attempts to remake and reboot these stories in film over the years, I was eager to go back to the source a bit. I have read Stoker's book, but not Shelley's. The Wolfman was an original screenplay.

Rather than enter into an exhaustive review of each film (You can find those online, and written by better qualified critics than your truly!), I thought I'd talk a little about what struck me after having not seen these films after so many years.

First of all, leaving aside things like primitive special effects (Any movie 70+ years old gets a pass there!), I was struck at how simple these films were. I don't mean they were crude, but they were distilled down to only the bones of the story. In both Dracula and Frankenstein's  cases, to the point where large chunks of the original story were simply dropped. Obviously at the time these were made, the studios didn't necessarily know they were filming anything that would become so iconic. They were making movies to sell tickets at the matinees.

The theme that ran through all three of these films was that modern man scoffed at the supernatural or divine at his peril. This is an idea that is still used quite a lot today. But back when these movies were made, the medium of film was, if not novel, the dominant form of entertainment and there were still new things to see.

In Dracula we see Renfield (his character was combined with Harker's) dismissing the villagers' warnings about going on to the castle at night. When the Count arrives in London society, Mina and the others accept him at face value. When van Helsing arrives, his greatest challenge is getting the people to believe that there are such things as vampires and the Count is one of them. The actual slaying of Dracula takes place off screen and is almost anticlimactic.

Frankenstein sets a wonderfully gloomy tone with the doctor and Fritz (no, not "Igor") robbing a grave. His fiancé and friends are worried about his odd behavior and confront him at the lab, where he is ready to bring his creation to life. He succeeds but is horrified at its violence ("Bad Brain!"). At the end, after the creature has gotten loose and wreaked its havoc, the doctor joins the villagers in hunting it down. After the monster is destroyed in a burning windmill, the doctor convalesces at his father's home. The implication is that his efforts to destroy the monster, along with the mental strain of his realization that it was a bad business to begin with, caused a breakdown.

Both of these cases are man vs. monster. There is an evil loosed upon the modern world. Men must recognize and defeat the evil.

But the Wolfman is different.

Lon Chaney Jr. plays Larry, the 2nd son of a lord who had gone to America to make his own way. When his brother dies, Larry returns as heir apparent. He and his father begin to reconnect and Larry notices a pretty girl in a shop. After some frankly creepy stalking by today's standards (watching her through a telescope), he convinces her to walk out with him to a gypsy camp where they can have their fortune's told. The upshot is one of the gypsies (played in fact by Bela Lugosi) is a werewolf and attacks one of the girl's friends. Larry beats the creature off with a silver handled walking stick but is wounded. The werewolf dies from the battering and turns back into Bela.

I tell this much of the plot to set the scene on Larry waking from his ordeal after being brought home. For a large stretch of the remaining film, it could be viewed as Larry losing his mind. It's in many ways a psychological thriller. He believes he killed a wolf, but instead there lies a dead man. He's told the legend of the werewolf and how surviving victims become wolves. His father, his doctor, and the local law are rational men and believe Larry is simply traumatized. And the argument could be made for it. Does he really change or is he suffering from a split personality? His victims can't say, they're dead! You could watch it from either perspective until the end, when the monster is confronted and defeated by a surviving witness.

What made the Wolfman different? I'm not sure. Perhaps it was the fact it was an original story instead of an adaptation. Maybe it was because it was made later. What I can say is that, after watching these classics through a much older pair of eyes, I was happy to revisit all three. But I would pick Chaney's film as the best "horror" movie.