Showing posts with label Magic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Magic. Show all posts

Spell Failure in Blackmoor

Author: DHBoggs / Labels: ,

Magic in early Blackmoor has often attracted interest, in part because it appears to have been so different from the "Vancian" system Gygax adopted for D&D.  When Arneson developed the magical component of his Blackmoor campaign he had little to go on in terms of source material.  The first edition CHAINMAIL booklet did list a handful of battlefield spells, but not much else.

 In his write up in the FFC titled "Original Blackmoor Magic", Arenson supplies a good general description of the methods he devised, but few of the specific details the curious gamer might wish for.  However, by pulling in information from other Blackmoor sources, we can cobble together a more complete picture.

 In particular, one aspect that has drawn some attention and has attracted a number of fans over the years is the idea of spell failure.

 Arneson wrote: "...there was always a chance of failure in spells (unless they were practiced)"  FFC77:74

 Presumably "they" means the spells, though it could mean the wizard, which might be more sensible, since it is unlikely Arneson or anyone else would want to keep track of how many times a wizard cast a particular spell in order to maintain some threshold of being "practiced" with it.  Given that Arneson also tells us "...to progress to a new level, one first learned the spells... there was no automatic progression, rather it was a slow step by step, spell by spell progression." FFC77:74, we can read that to mean mastering a spell level to the point of no failure meant you were "practiced" with those spells.

 We know from other sources - the Corner of the Table Newsletter in particular - that wizards also had "levels".  The highest level we know of being 12, in the case of a 12th level sorceress mentioned in the after action report of the July 1972 battle of Lake Gloomin.

 We also know that spell failure varied among casters.  The description of the Gin of Salik tells us "His magic spells are among the most potent in the world with no chance of them failing..." FFC77:20

 For the 7th level Ran of Ah Foo: "He also has a spell workshop that turns out one Level I spell a week and one Level II spell a month with one level III spell a year.  These are portable but not reusable with only a 15% failure rate."  FFC77:19

 And finally, the bumbling Egg of Coot, who sells spells with a "30% chance of failure per level of spell, i.e. III = 50%, II = 40%, etc."  FFC77:18

 A last bit of information to consider is the number of spell levels themselves.  The highest spell level appears to be level IV, because of the Gin's spells we are told. "All of which are level IV, at a rate of one every two months..." FFC77:20

 Thus we have some numbers to play around with here.  Correlation does not equal causation, but the above certainly suggest, as we might expect, that as a wizard advanced in level their rate of failure declined, so let's go with that and see where it leads.  We can start with the Egg and assume he (or whoever makes his spells) is a Wizard of unknown level producing spells of levels I through IV.

 The failure pattern at this level x is:

 Spell level I,  30%
Spell level II  40%
Spell level III 50%
Spell level IV 60%

 If the Ran is really level 7 and has a 15% fail rate, the the pattern above would seem to change in 5% increments.  The text implies all of his spells fail at 15%, so perhaps there is a change of the rules between these two examples, but if we presume this rate applies to Ran's best spells (level 3), we get this:  

 Spell level I,  5%
Spell level II  10%
Spell level III 15%
Spell level IV 20%

 However, if we go back to the Eggs failure rate, and improve in 5% increments from the worst it could represent (1st level wizard), we get a table like this:

Wizard Level
I Spell
II Spell
III Spell
IV Spell
1
30
40
50
60
2
25
35
45
55
3
20
30
40
50
4
15
25
35
45
5

20
30
40
6

15
25
35
7


20
30
8


15
25
9



20
10



15
11



10
12



5

We're told the Ran is 7th level but the 5% table based on the Egg's failure rate tells us that a 7th level wizard should have a 20% failure rate at level 7 and a 15% failure rate at level 8.  So either the Ran is 5% better than he should be, or the Egg is 5% worse.  

 Interestingly, we are told the Egg has a mere "level II intelligence with a mature age of 3 to 6." FFC77 p18  Ascribing a 5% penalty for low Intelligence may seem too "modern" an idea, but it isn't outside the realm of possibility of what Arneson might have done.   
In any case, it works for us, so let's recast the table assuming Ran has a "standard" failure rate.
Wizard Level
I Spell
II Spell
III Spell
IV Spell
1
25
35
45
55
2
20
30
40
50
3
15
25
35
45
4
10
20
30
40
5
5
15
25
35
6
0
10
20
30
7
0
5
15
25
8
0
0
10
20
9
0
0
5
15
10
0
0
0
10
11
0
0
0
5
12
0
0
0
0

There's a couple more reasons to prefer this second table, first, because it benefits players slightly, and secondly because it zero's out at level 12, which is the highest level we know of as mentioned earlier, and we know in at least the case of the Gin of Salik, it is possible to be at a level so high your spells do not fail.

 To apply this table to D&D spells, the Referee should change only the range of spell level, and I would recommend that only for the last 2 columns so that "III spell" becomes Spell level 3 &4, and IV Spell becomes spell levels 5 & 6.

 What exactly happens when a spell fails is up to you.

10 comments

Converting the FFC swords to OD&D.

Author: DHBoggs / Labels: ,


Following up on my post here The First Magic Swords , this will be a look at how to convert them to an OD&D game.  Certainly there's an appeal to the idea of using these swords in an "old school" game today, especially if your game is set in Blackmoor.   For example, I've been adapting the lower level of Arneson's Blackmoor Dungeon to OD&D, where some of these swords appear in their original form.  This conversion method would also work for any new swords created using the old method.

Of course, the FFC swords could be used as is, but they are quite different from the standard swords and don't integrate well with other magic weapons that might be floating around in your campaign.
 
As it happens, the same problem was faced when TSR published Adventures in Blackmoortm for use with the BECMI classic rules by Frank Mentzer.  There are at least three of the FFC swords present in the Rogues and Rascals section of AiB: 

Bolitho's "White" sword
Svenny's "Maroon" 
Philo's "Weasel" (this last is apparently sword "M" in the FFC).  

These three swords were converted to BeCMI stats, and while not exactly the same as standard OD&D, these conversions can provide a good guide to follow.

I won't bore you with the exact stats for each - you can of course look them up if you like.  Instead, lets jump straight to the meat.

First, in the FFC there's a clear power differentiation between the Lettered swords and the Colored swords, with the colored swords being the more powerful and more magical. Accordingly,  AiB converted each differently into the standard D&D "+" rating.

Lettered swords convert to +1 and to +3 versus "Double Value" enemies. 

Colored swords convert to +2 , and to +3 versus "Double Value" enemies. 

Double "doubles values" in the FFC were simply ignored, and several similar monsters were converted into a single type like "undead".   The AiB conversion also sometimes ignores some of the FFC double value monsters - Balrogs for instance - but I would include them for OD&D.

Determining Intelligence:
The original FFV swords don't have an intelligence or an ego rating and with only three cases to look at, it is impossible to say for certain how the AiB numbers were arrived at.  The FFC swords do have an intelligence increase bonus that is granted to the wielder, and I note that if you add 6 to that bonus you get the Intelligence scores listed in AiB.  However, that's not really going to work for us.

The reason why has to do with how Intelligence determines the number of Primary Powers in OD&D.  In fact each pip of intelligence above 7 adds a new Primary Power.  In the FFC, the "Special Values" each sword has are equivalent to the Primary Powers of an OD&D sword, so for the Swords Intelligence score to match its number of primary powers the score has to be a specific minimum number.  Here is a conversion table:

#SV
INT


1
7
2
8
3
9
4
10
4 + magic
11

12

Where a sword has a double or more Special Value, I treated each case as an additional power.  To convert these to OD&D terms is a case by case thing but will usually involve doubling the distance or power of the effect.

Determining Ego:
For Ego, we can look at the existing scores for the FFC and come up with a number that matches the ego scores given for the three swords found in AiB.  Now I doubt very much that the method I detail below is what TSR actually did (they probably just rolled a new one) but using this method allows the use of the original numbers found in the FFC, and will give you a consistent conversion rather than a random one.

So to determine the swords Ego, add the FFC swords Combat Increase score to the Strength score and divide by 2 (round up).

Magic Ability:
OD&D swords don't normally have spell casting ability, but it fits in just fine, and I keep this feature of the FFC sword in my campaign.  If desired, the DM could drop this ability in exchange for an extraordinary power.  Magic ability requires a minimum 11 Intelligence.

In the FFC, Arneson himself tells us how to handle it for D&D, "Magic Spells (Referee determines it secretly) - roll once for level of the spell using a 6 sided die and then roll again on the standard basic spell list for that level to determine which spells are being carried on the sword." (77:67)

Alignment:
The FFC swords apparently had an alignment, as we know from Greg Svenson.  Unfortunetly that information is not in the FFC, so you simply have to roll for it again, following the usual proceedure.


That's all there is to it.  Here are two examples of converted swords:

A (Neutral)
+1
+3 vs Dragons, Undead, Elementals, Balrogs
Int 9
Ego 5
Powers:
Detect Evil, Cause Morale Check -1 (100'), Detect Magic

 "Green" (Neutral) ,
+2
+3 vs Lycanthropes, Goblins, Ogres, Trolls, Elementals, Orcs, Balrogs
Int 9
Ego 6
Powers:
Detect Invisible 120'. Detect Magic, Cause Morale Check -1 (100')




0 comments

The Magic of Treasure!

Author: DHBoggs / Labels: , , , ,


 In D&D and AD&D and clones, Treasure Types (A, B, C, etc.) have been often discussed, as has been the "abandoned" or "unguarded" dungeon level treasure tables such as that on page 7 of Underworld and Wilderness Adventure.   Yet surprisingly, the "Items" aka magic items or "prize" table of Monster & Treasures page 23 is almost never talked about.  The loot the players acquire is perhaps the most important aspect of a campaign, especially the magic items.  Certainly, the use of items of magic greatly effects encounters.  Adventurers equipped with fireball wands and displacer cloaks are going to have a very different monster encounter, than the same party might if equipped with run of the mill arms and armor.  In theory then, that makes the Magic Item distribution table of prime importance, perhaps one of the most crucial tables in the game.  Yet,  it is seldom considered.

Instead folks tend to argue over whether and when to use which lair or level treasure table, or whether to use some 3e style GP reward calculation, or as is often the case, to just make it up from scratch.

Here's the thing - whatever means used for determining coin and jewels, it's almost irrelevant, it is the Magic Items table that ultimately has the biggest game impact. 
What isn't being appreciated here is the reality that the game was designed with the expectation that, barring a few special purchases, the average group of adventurers would have exactly the same percentage of magic items as in the items table.  In other words, if the table generates magic Rings 5% of the time, then 5% of the party's magical possessions will be rings.

That magic item balance should hold true at least until 11+ levels, where the Magic-User can begin to make their own items.  Indeed the very reason magic item creation is prohibited until 11th level may well have been to keep lower level Magic users from over gifting themselves with powerful magic, and thereby skewing the general balance between classes.

With this in mind, I thought it very interesting to trace the evolution of the various magic item distribution tables as a design element.

As the presentation standard, I'll use the table order given in AD&D, since it is undoubtedly the most common.  Notice that maps are included, and I have further interpreted this category to include manuscript and books, because that  is indeed the case in some instances we will be looking at.

Maps & Manuscripts
Potions
Scrolls
Rings
Rods, Staves, Wands
Miscellaneous Magic
Armor & Shields
Swords
Miscellaneous Weapons

Here to follow are all the important magic item tables from pre-D&D to AD&D, as devised by Gygax & Arneson.

The oldest record we have isn't actually a table, but a stocking list.  In Dave Arneson's First Fantasy Campaign, he reprints his dungeon stocking notes for levels 7-9 and Tunnels, ranging from late 1971 to late 1972, with the tunnels seemingly being the earliest.  By categorizing the various items, figuring out the frequency per level and averaging across all 4 levels, we get the following combined results.

ITEM
%
Maps & Manuscripts
0
Potions
0
Scrolls
14
Rings
0
Rods, Staves, Wands
0
Miscellaneous Magic
11
Armor & Shields
24
Swords
29
Miscellaneous Weapons
24

(The figures in all the tables shown here are rounded to whole numbers sometimes resulting in a total slightly over 100).

Given the small sample size, these figures certainly are not "scientifically" accurate, but I'd say they give us a pretty good idea about magic treasure in early Blackmoor.  Take note of what is not found on the list, especially rings, wands and curiously, potions.  These are all items that have yet to be added to the game. Techincally, there are no "scrolls" either, instead there are "spells".  Although these spells may be something like liquid based balls, they essentially function just as a scroll would in game play, whether the spell is on paper or not. In any case, perhaps the most significant thing to note here is that magic swords made up nearly 1/3 of the treasure, and when combined with other weapons and armor, nearly 2/3rds of the magic to be found is combat equipment.  While this does get significantly modified over time, we shall see that the dominance of weapons and armor remains in the game throughout the Gygax/Arneson era.

Our next table is even more complicated.  In the summer of 1972 Arneson created a new adventure area called Loch Gloomin, and created new stocking tables for it.  I've previously cleaned up and commented on those tables in this post.  

http://boggswood.blogspot.com/2014/08/stocking-blackmoor-wilds-in-1972.html

These stocking tables rely on a series of d6 and 2d6 rolls, so converting them to % required a few more steps, and won't neatly add up to 100% because some 10% of the items (such as clothing) have no equivalent in the AD&D items table.  When all is said and done, here is what the 1972 item table comes to:

ITEM
%
Maps & Manuscripts
9
Potions
22
Scrolls
2
Rings
0
Rods, Staves, Wands
6
Miscellaneous Magic
20
Armor & Shields
5
Swords
9
Miscellaneous Weapons
14

Interestingly, swords have really dropped off here, and potions have the biggest share.  Nevertheless, weapons and armor altogether still account for 1/3rd of the treasure overall.  Scrolls and wands are now apparent, but there are still no rings.

Alright, moving on to the next table - found on the very next page of the FFC following the Loch Gloomin notes - we have Arneson's draft Magic Items table that Gygax developed into the published version found in OD&D, as confidently demonstrated in this post (about halfway down) 

http://boggswood.blogspot.com/2014/11/the-mystery-of-18-pages-of-notes.html .  Here is how it breaks out in the AD&D order:
   
ITEM
%
Maps & Manuscripts
11
Potions
13
Scrolls
0
Rings
0
Rods, Staves, Wands
7
Miscellaneous Magic
10
Armor & Shields
13
Swords
36
Miscellaneous Weapons
9

Swords are once again the big story here at a whopping 36% of finds, and of course, weapons and armor are again close to 2/3rds of the items.  Before getting to much in to the nitty gritty, lets move on to OD&D, via Gygax spring of 1973 draft (as copied in Mark Bufkin's Beyond This Point be Dragons), side by side with the published version of 1974, and the reorganized "Holmes Bluebook" version of 1977.

ITEM
'73 Draft
%
'74 3lbbs
%
'77
%
Maps & Manuscripts
16
25
25
Potions
13
19
19
Scrolls
8
15
15
Rings
17
4
4
Rods, Staves, Wands
4
4
4
Miscellaneous Magic
4
4
4
Armor & Shields
13
11
5
Swords
13
15
15
Miscellaneous Weapons
9
4
10

These three were all put together by Gary Gygax (including the "Holmes" table), and thus reflect his thinking in the OD&D era. 

There's lots here to take note of. Rings make their first appearance, and the significance of maps in the treasure hoard is clearly a big change from Arneson's tables.  As someone who has used these tables, I can honestly say coming up with a new map for 1 out of 4 of the treasures with "items" wasn't something I looked forward to.  Another important trend to note in these tables is that the chance for perishable items like potions and scrolls tend to go up, at the expense of permanent items like armor and, especially, rings.  This trend is no accident as Gygax explains on page 121 of The Dungeonmaster's Guide:

            As mentioned previously, the MAGIC ITEMS table is weighted towards
            results which balance the game.  Potions, scrolls, armor and arms are
            plentiful.  Rings, rods and miscellaneous items of magic represent only a
            25% occurrence on the table.  This is so done in order to keep magic-users
            from totally dominating ploy.  They are sufficiently powerful characters
            without adding piles of supplementary goodies.  What they gain from the
            table will typically be used up and discarded.

By the same token, the high occurrence of swords and combat equipment greatly favors Fighters - a fact which also improves the balance between the Fighting and Magic using classes.

With that in mind, let's move on to something fun.  Suppose we look at all the tables thus far considered and average them out.  Theoretically, that would give us a good merger of both Gygax and Arneson's general views.  Here is what we get:

ITEM
OD&D Era Average of all %
Average without BM Dungeon
%
Maps & Manuscripts
14
17
Potions
15
18
Scrolls
13
10
Rings
3
5
Rods, Staves, Wands
4
5
Miscellaneous Magic
9
8
Armor & Shields
12
9
Swords
20
18
Miscellaneous Weapons
12
9

Now you will notice I've done this two ways - a column with all the data looked at thus far and a column  without the data gleaned from the Blackmoor Dungeon levels.   I find that including the Blackmoor dungeon data is both historically relevant and yields the most interesting results for game play.  Consequently, these "average of all" numbers form the basis of most of those used in the Champions of ZED prize table.  The exceptions are that wands etc. in the CoZ table use the 5% figure at the expense of 1 % from maps.  I also arbitrarily lowered the Miscellaneous Magic to 7% which is both closer to the OD&D percentage and necessary to get a true 100% total.  Table shown below:    

ITEM
Champions of ZED
Maps & Manuscripts
13
Potions
15
Scrolls
13
Rings
3
Rods, Staves, Wands
5
Miscellaneous Magic
7
Armor & Shields
12
Swords
20
Miscellaneous Weapons
12

Before going further, it is interesting in light of the DMG quote to consider the direction Gygax went for AD&D.

ITEM
AD&D DMG
Unearthed Arcana
Maps & Manuscripts
11*
1*
Potions
18
20
Scrolls
14
15
Rings
4
5
Rods, Staves, Wands
14
15
Miscellaneous Magic
13
14
Armor & Shields
14
15
Swords
9
11
Miscellaneous Weapons
13
14

*These percentages are extracted from items subsumed in the miscellaneous magic tables; and I included "scarabs" when determining the percentage or amulets & medalions, because they are sometimes described as amulets.   Although in AD&D maps have a 10% chance of appearing, UA appears to drop maps altogether.  Books are extremely rare in each. 

As can be readily observed the "items" tables of the Dungeon Masters Guide and Unearthed Arcana are practically the same, especially if Maps were included in UA or removed from AD&D.  As Gygax's "last word" on the matter it might be interesting to compare our raw average of Gygax + Arneson OD&D with Gygax AD&D:

ITEM
AD&D DMG
OD&D Era Average of all %
CoZ
Maps & Manuscripts
11*
14
13
Potions
18
15
15
Scrolls
14
13
13
Rings
4
3
3
Rods, Staves, Wands
14
4
5
Miscellaneous Magic
13
9
7
Armor & Shields
14
12
12
Swords
9
20
20
Miscellaneous Weapons
13
12
12

Remarkably, there are really only two differences here greater than 3%.  The chance to get magic swords is significantly better in the OD&D average, and Wands/Staves significantly less.  These two differences are very important however for an OD&D campaign. 

Wands/staves are truly one of the most powerful and handy tools at the Magic-users disposal.  At most in all the OD&D era tables, wands and staves comprise no more than 7% of magical treasure, and usually only about 4%.  Yet in AD&D wands are 2 to 4 times more frequent.  I've seen players with bandoleers of wands, but by the book, an OD&D character should hardly ever find them!

So what we get with the CoZ table, and to a slightly lesser extent in the OD&D table, is a distribution of magic items that greatly favors fighters through equipment and disposable items.  Swords in particular, usually of the intelligent variety, are much more of a staple in the OD&D game, and more still (5%) in CoZ as they were in Blackmoor.  If closely followed, as intended, the Magic Items table is indeed a game changer.  


2 comments

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

About Me

My photo
Game Archaeologist/Anthropologist, Scholar, Historic Preservation Analyst, and a rural American father of three.
Powered by Blogger.

My Blog List

Followers