Early Dungeons & Dragons is sometimes maligned for its arbitrary and nonsensical rules. In some cases this is earned, and in other cases not, but I want to spend time going through some of the more egregious examples and how I plan to explain them in a way that makes sense for my campaign.
Before I begin, though, I just want it to be known that I don't really subscribe to the "nonsense rules" argument. Early D&D has specific design goals, and is very "gamist". The rules may not always make the most narrative or diegetic sense, but in most cases you can see the purpose that each rule serves in the game. Some of these rules are primitive, absolutely. They were bound to be at this early stage of the hobby. Some of them are badly worded, which is less forgivable. But they are all purposeful, and I want to preserve them in my campaign as much as I can. The trick is, how to make them palatable to modern players? You know, aside from just telling them "it's a game and these are the rules". For some reason, that doesn't always fly.
So here goes, original D&D's most "nonsensical" rules, and how I plan to explain them.
Elves
I've blogged about this before, but the way that Elves switch between the fighter and magic-user classes between games is a tricky one. I put this in the "primitive and badly worded rules" category. My initial thought was to have Elves adhere completely to the rules of whichever class they chose for that adventure, so that they can only cast spells when operating as a magic-user, and only use weapons and armour when operating as a fighter. In the interests of compatibility with Advanced D&D, I'm going back on that. My Elves will now be able to cast spells, use weapons, and wear armour at the same time, no matter which class they are operating as, just like in AD&D. The main thing that will change when they switch class is their hit points, fighting capability, and saving throws. So the discrepancy between classes is less than it might have been, but it is still there.
The easy answer here is this: Elves are just different. They're ancient, immortal beings with a higher connection to the gods, and they just don't think or operate like any of the other races. I'm planning to go a bit Middle Earth with my Elves (going straight to the source, as it were), and give them a yearning for the "Undying Lands". Unlike Middle Earth (or as I see it like Middle Earth some centuries after Lord of the Rings), I'm making it so that said Undying Lands can no longer be reached, so the Elves have this desire they can never satisfy, and have dwindled. Even so, they're still more powerful than everyone else out there, as even a cursory glance at their list of special abilities will tell you...
I got a bit side-tracked there, but this one really isn't too hard to explain. Adventuring Elves meditate to achieve the correct mind-set before adventuring, and their capabilities (hit points, fighting capability, saving throws) reflect this. With spells, weapons, and armour always available, it's not going to make too much difference unless said Elf gains a lot of levels in one class, but few in the other. Nothing quite like going from 4 Hit Dice one adventure down to 1 HD the next... But smart players should split their level advancement quite evenly.
I'm not too fussed about this one, because if it becomes too unwieldy I'll happily switch to the multi-classing rules from AD&D, where the character gains experience in all classes at the same time. (And if you're wondering how I justify rules changes in the fictional setting, check out this post right here.)
Clerics Can Only Use Blunt Weapons
This is another one I tackled in an earlier post. It's not so much an original D&D conundrum, as it applies to most editions of D&D before 3rd. There's very minimal real-world justification for restricting clerics to blunt weapons, but in-game the reason is obvious: to stop clerics from being able to use powerful magic swords. They already have their own spells, after all. In spite of the game logic, I still feel like I need to justify it. What I came up with was a pact between mortals and the gods after a catastrophic war: the gods agreed to leave the mortal world, and mortals agreed never to take up blades against the gods and their servants. And with the servants of the gods being basically anyone with an alignment (whether they know it or not), that means anyone strictly following that pact won't use a bladed weapon ever. So the basic situation is that the gods set forth a badly worded pact, and mortals found the loophole by hefting clubs and maces... But nowadays it's become more of a tradition than anything else, and only the most devout followers of the gods (i.e. clerics) will follow it to the letter.
Infravision in the Dungeon
Check out these arbitrary bits of tomfuckery, courtesy of Gary Gygax and/or Dave Arneson. From Volume 2: Monsters & Treasure, we have the following:
It is generally true that any monster or man can see in total darkness as far as the dungeons are concerned save player characters.
And from Volume 3: The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures:
Monsters are assumed to have permanent infravision as long as they are not serving some character.
Boy oh boy. So you're saying that everything in the dungeon except for the player characters can see in the dark? And that as soon as a PC recruits a monster or non-player character, they lose the ability to see in the dark? You almost have to see it in hard copy to believe it.
I get the thinking here though. Is it not desirable to have the PCs exploring darkened corridors by the light of a torch, or groping along the walls when those torches go out? Doesn't having members of the party that can see in the dark destroy this vibe completely? It only gets worse when you remember that, as per the Chainmail wargame, dwarves and elves can see in the dark. You go down that slippery-slope, and eventually you end up like 5th edition, where it seems that literally everyone not human can see in the dark (and who plays a human in that edition anyway?).
While I do get the thinking, I usually err on the side of letting the PCs have and enjoy their abilities. Elves and dwarves can see in the dark? Perfectly fine. Bobric the fighter recruited some orcs into his service, and they all have infravision? Good for you, Bobric, you earned that little perk.
However... Despite my instincts, that's not what the rules say. They're quite clear on the matter: when in the "underworld", the PCs and their servants can't see in the dark, and everyone else can. So how to explain it?
I'm going all the way back to the concept of the "Dungeon as Mythic Underworld", as outlined by Philotomy Jurament way way back in the days of the Good Internet (i.e., before social media). I can't find the original, but it's preserved here. It basically puts forth the idea that the dungeon doesn't follow the rules of the natural world, and that it might be controlled or inhabited by some force inimical to those invading from above. (As an aside, Philotomy's Musings which I just linked to are a seminal work of the old-school D&D revival, and anyone who hasn't read them really should do.)
This works with my "entity dreaming deep below the dungeon" concept perfectly, so I'm going with it. The darkness of the dungeon is just different, deeper and blacker than normal darkness, a stygian miasma that even those with infravision can't penetrate. (I busted out the pretentious thesaurus for this one. Or perhaps I've just read too much of Gary Gygax...) The only creatures that can see in that darkness are those that have fully given themselves over to the dreams, and they can do so regardless of whether they had infravision before. And just as the dungeon giveth, it can taketh... Any man or monster that forsakes the underworld for service to a PC will lose that connection.
Note that this only applies to the central underworld/mega-dungeon of my campaign. Creatures with infravision will be able to see at night, they'll be able to see in a dark forest, they'll even be able to see in dungeons other than the mega-dungeon. Most of them, anyway, I'm not ruling out there being other dungeons with the same kind of impenetrable darkness. But for the most part, outside of the mega-dungeon infravision will work. Inside the mega-dungeon, it's arbitrary rules ahoy.
Doors That Only Open for Monsters
I present for your pleasure one more bit of tomfuckery. I won't quote the rule directly, because it's split over a few sentences, but it boils down to the following. For PCs, dungeon doors are always stuck, and require a roll of 1-2 on 1d6 to open. For monsters, they automatically open with no trouble. Something else that might potentially stick in the collective craw of my players, then.
I don't have to belabour this one though, because I already explained it above: the mythic underworld did it. The dreaming entity is working for the dungeon's inhabitants, and working against the PCs. So in the mega-dungeon, it will work as outlined above, and I'm free to have doors work however I want in other places and situations.
So that's it for some of D&D's more arbitrary rules, at least the ones I could think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are others I've forgotten, and I'm even more sure there are others that will come up during play. No doubt I will get to them in time.
In other news, I have a positive update on the copy of the Avalon Hill boardgame Outdoor Survival that I ordered: it's no longer stuck in transit! It had been lying dormant since December 12th, with no movement to speak of, but over the last week it's made it to Australia and should be arriving in my hot little hands within a day or two. So expect a post about that coming up, as I have some ideas about how I'm going to integrate that game's board into my campaign.
No comments:
Post a Comment