Unafraid of the High Level Game

Well, this week we got in another session of the Night Below, and the second game of the assault on The City of The Glass Pool. The final stretch of the campaign.

I was sort of fearing this part of the campaign for a couple of reasons. One, I don’t have all that much experience with levels above 7th, even after all these decades. I’m not saying characters haven’t hit 8th, 9th, or even higher in past games. It’s just that my preference is to run for low to mid levels (1-7), probably because a campaign would end and I would be interested in new groups of PC’s. Secondly, I just thought that an assault on a city would be a logistic nightmare of the type I haven’t run for many a moon. Sure, I’ve had characters involved in wars and great battlefields, but an urban location being attacked by players is rare in my games.

One thing I do like about high levels is that things get more like comic book battles, which is what I was brought up on. And the last couple of games have been no exception. The COTGP is somewhat in lockdown mode, which means the streets are not exactly crawling with enemies. There are some large patrols, but in the first foray into the city the party used the 100 hydra teeth to create a small army of skeletons to run interference with patrols, and also Krysantha had whipped up an insect plague to mess with part of the city while they attacked the Illithid building and then in this game the slave pens before hoofing it out of the city and back to base for a rest (with some help from allies blowing up part of the city gate for easier exit). They got out and back to the safe place with around 100 slaves, many of them dwarves with skills that might come in handy. This was all much more fun than I thought it would be for me. It really is just like running a dungeon, just with much bigger corridors!

Back at the “Derro Town” captured mind flayer tower, the party found out that a band of drow, Avatara and her crew from games early this year, had taken over the tavern in the deserted under-town. Their goal is to eventually make their way to the site of the old drow city on the Sunless Sea. This is why they are rooting for the party to destroy the COTGP. Just one of many evil groups the party is forced to deal with.

As we are on the last couple of games of the campaign, here is a list of all the PC’s and NPC’s who are the “heavy hitters” of the campaign. For posterities sake if nothing else.

Vaidno (Andy): 8th level chaotic/good half elf bard from the big city up north. Not a btb bard, but my own more musically inclined bard class (based off the old houri class from White Dwarf magazine). Vaidno has survived many near death encounters, leading me to call him “Survivno.” Acrobatic, skillful with blades, Vaidno faces the nightmares of the Night Below setting with great bravery and is more like a fighter in mentality. Often gets short-shrifted on magic items. Recently gained both a tower and an 18 charisma from the Deck of Many Things.

Krysantha (Dan): 8ish level fighter/druid. Female drow raised by druids. Formerly lawful neutral, decided recently she was plain neutral. I think she is chaotic, but I’m tired of arguing with players about their alignment. Remorseless murderer of NPC’s, and big time grudge-holder. Along with Vaidno takes the most vocal leadership role in the group.

Helena (Terry): chaotic/neutral with good tend. 8ish level fighter/thief. Does not live a thiefly livestyle, is actually a kleptomaniac. Was raised in a house with several fighter brothers who taught her sword and shield. Has a knack for talking the other players out of magic items without even having to steal them. Like many of Terry’s characters, is obsessed with marriage. Got wishes from the Deck of Many Things, and used most of them for fairly petty gains.

Kayla (Terry): 8th level hobbit cleric of Sheenara and Sherriff of the southern hobbit border. A character of Terry’s since the early 90’s, I let her join the party pretty much just because she was in the area (and they did not have a cleric). A player kind of complained about Terry running two characters, which has some merit because Terry often takes a long time to take a turn for a character. As the other players did not defend her presence, I had her go back to her castle, where her new band of followers awaited her anyway. A high level cleric would be a big boon to survival right now, but since the players have not requester her they can lump it. If Terry’s Helena dies in the next couple games, I’ll have Kayla appear.

Lumarin (Big Ben): 8th level high elf lawful good MU. The main party magic user. Lost several points of intelligence from a Deck of Many Things draw. Originally joined the party early on in The Night Below campaign when the party saved him from being eaten by Gnolls.

Lily (Paul): chaotic/neutral (later evil) 7ish level thief/MU. Greedy harlot who was saved from Gnolls along with Lumarin. Got in many confrontations with Krysantha over stealing items from treasure troves. Eventually betrayed the party to her boyfriend Xavier. Ran off with Xavier and his gang after the fight. Officially out of the party, but still active in the campaign in case the characters want to find her and kill her. They kind of have bigger fish to fry right now.

Zith (Paul): I had sort of planned to have some Githyanki (extra dimensional anti-mind flayer warriors) show up at some point in this campaign. I didn’t, but when Paul could not run Lily anymore I just gave him an 8th level fighter Githyanki to run in the party. Paul seems to dig that character, but ultimately this is just a player running an NPC. If anybody dies in the next game or two, they can run a Githyanki as well.

Ormac (Little Ben): 6ish level gnome illusionist. Ben played for a while the other year, but had to drop out for work. He returned a couple months ago and so did Ormac. Ben misses a lot of games in general, so Ormac is kind of a “there not there” side player in the whole thing.

Major NPC’s

Dia: teenage ranger and (unknown to her until recently) daughter of Woodlord Arcturus Grimm. She pretty much got the party together over two years ago to go explore a dungeon. They got sidetracked by The Night Below. She is from the same town as Helena, and they knew each other growing up. She eventually took possession of the anti-Kuo Toa sword Finslayer.

Arcturus Grimm: One time Woodking of the ranger kingdom of Woodaria in the far north. A controversial figure, he is also known for having been possessed by evil decades ago when he caused great suffering in the land. He now lives in the southern frontier area in a garden temple dedicated to his sister Sheenara, goddess of the wood. Arcturus was my very first character as a little kid, and I kept him in my game world to use over the decades ( one of the few “super NPC’s” I indulge in). Arcturus has apparently spent the last few decades siring children all over the land with different women.

Clovis Grimm: underdark ranger in the Night Below, and son of Arcturus Grimm. Unlike Dia he is in frequent contact with his father, and has helped guide the party in some of their travels below. Currently protecting the freed slaves the party has saved.

Avatara: a fighter/MU/thief drow NPC and drow city expat I have used for decades in my games, going by a variety of names. She is best known for living in Tanmoor and acting as guild mage for the elvish thieves’ guild there. In the current campaign she is on some kind of mission with other, younger drow to find the lost city of drow on the Sunless Sea. After an encounter with Krysantha and Vaidno awhile back, Krys has sworn to kill her, but she is an asset currently (Avatara wants the party to destroy the City of the Glass Pool so she can travel down to the Sunless Sea). This NPC is personally responsible for killing one of Terry’s characters back in the 90’s. At one point in the late 90’s I successfully had her seduce a female wood elf PC.

Top Ten craziest AD&D rules (part 1)

Here is a countdown of the top ten most insane AD&D rules. It’s from a site called Topless Robot (one of around a thousand geek sites with the word “robot” in the name). Each item is followed by my own (hold the applause) witty and informative comment on it.

Because it’s a little lengthy (3 or 4 pages or so) post, I’ll do the first five today, then post the other five in a couple of days.


10) Treasure Type

This system of treasure placement suggests that every Gargoyle has 2-8 pieces of gold on them at all times, or that Shambling Mounds always have on their person an assortment of coin, a few gems, a couple of scrolls, and maybe a potion or miscellaneous magic item (not to mention that carrot they have for a nose, just in case you're feeling snacky). Once players realized that this system was more or less a guarantee of at least a chance for a specific item type to drop, it becomes incentive to hunt them down. Who cares if nymphs are neutral good? She's Treasure Type Q and X, man!


My take: I hardly ever used the random treasure type stuff; although at some point in Jr. High I was using some tables from the monster and treasure assortment. Ultimately, it was more fun for me to just decide for myself what the creature had on its person or in its lair. Sure, I keep the Old School Encounter Ref in my game bag for emergencies these days for when characters wander off the beaten (and plotted)path, but that isn’t really based on monster type anyway. Yeah, we don’t need no steeking treasure type lists for monsters.

9) Level Titles

Okay, so these are pretty damn cool, and remain a fond memory for most players familiar with the 1st Edition rules. But if you think about it, they're also pretty nuts -- why is a 1st level fighter a veteran, if they're first level? They're even sort of insulting, in some cases. Take the Cleric titles: at sixth level, you're a Catholic Canon; at seventh, you embrace Buddhism as a Lama; and at eighth, you're a Patriarch out of the Greek Orthodox tradition. All this from a cleric who worships Odin. Seriously, this is just asking for religious boycotts. And while we're talking about it, was there anyone who played a kick-ass Monk who wanted to go by the title "Grand Master of Flowers"?


My take: this is a very good point, and flavor or no I don’t really use them. Let’s for sure hold off on calling Mr. 1st level fighter a “veteran” until he has killed his first orc and kissed his first girl (put a female orc in there and you got yourself a two-in-one).


8) Magic-Users

The name alone warrants inclusion on this list. Later editions fixed this -- "mages" in 2nd Edition, "wizards" in 3rd. But really, anything was better than what they fixed upon for the 1st Edition. It becomes status quo for most players, but think about it--by this nomenclature, fighters (which had at least by this point graduated from the gender-exclusive and similarly lame class title of "fighting men") should have been called "sword-users" and thieves would have been called "lockpick-users." (I'm excluding clerics from this example, since they would have been called "healing-users with a blunt weapon of only marginal combat value"--which they already sort of were.) But the real beef about Magic-Users in 1st Edition was that in terms of magical combat, they were one-shot and done. One magic missile or sleep spell, and they were done for the remainder. Mages make up for this by being insanely powerful on the other end -- when fighters are doing only slightly more damage per hit than they were doing at first level, mages can lay waste to an attacking platoon in a single round. But getting past that early going when a decent wand is more useful than you? That's a tough row to hoe there, Gandalf.


My take: Bah, I don’t really care. I tend to use the term MU or Magic-User because I like to reserve terms like mage or wizard for a character that has advanced somewhat (but not necessarily a name level). In in may game world, I assume people refer to them as magic-users (even though there are other types of spellcasters). As far as MU’s being a little light in the pocket spellwise at low levels, well, them’s the breaks. In the last couple decades I gave new MU’s a couple of random spells “in mind” that they can cast once a day, but for my next campaign I’m just thinking of giving them access to cantrips again, and making those cantrips free and castable anytime, with perhaps a 3-5 a day limit.

7) Arbitrary Limits as to Gender, Race, and Class

Admittedly, this is a broad category. But the problem here is well represented in the early pages of the first edition Players Handbook, in which in his preface on page 6, Gary Gygax mentions that readers will find "no baseless limits arbitrarily placed on female strength"...and then two pages later, the rules specifically state that human female fighters are limited to no more than an 18/50 strength. (It can, of course, be argued that this can still be seen as consistent, and that Gygax meant that those limits -- which are even more stringent, by the way, if your character is demi-human and not a fighter -- are neither arbitrary nor baseless...but that only exacerbates the problem.) But seeing as how that score is (supposedly) rare, there are better examples: how about a cleric of Poseidon who can't wield a trident? A dwarven fighter who can't rise higher than 9th level? (And too bad for you if you wanted to be a half-elf cleric, because you couldn't go higher than 4th level.) Why? Some of it is game mechanics -- unlimited levels were one of the few perks that existed insofar as being a human was concerned, back then -- and the game designers didn't want magic-users and clerics using swords, so they just forbade it (and even though 3rd Edition and onwards has corrected this issue to some degree, it still lingers in legacy games like World of Warcraft.) But other things -- like gender differentials for ability scores and the like? That's not a game balance thing; that's just alienating half your potential audience. To be fair, later editions of the game went too far the other way, and relied almost exclusively on the feminine pronouns -- so the game switched from exclusionary to pandering. Great work.


My take: Heh, I remember some gaming material in the 80’s going with the “she” or “her” instead of the usual male reference. Political correctness at its finest. I also remember fondly articles in The Dragon and The Dungeoneer in the early 80’s aimed at female players (with titles like “Those Lovely Ladies”) that seemed to think women in gaming were getting the short shrift. I had a superhot girlfriend who played in my games when I was in high school (she was already a fan of Sci Fi and fantasy so this hot chick playing D&D was not that weird), and all my jealous gamer friends would have their characters kiss her charcter’s asses in attempts to at least get favor from her PC’s in a way they could only dream of in real life. This was in stark contrast to when I took her around my football teammates, where my friends would try to kick my ass to impress her. Best of both worlds. Jeez, I took this comment in a weird direction. Ah, memories.

6) Bards

Holy crap, why was it so hard to be a bard in first edition? Any idiot can pick up a lute and start strumming it in a tavern -- so why in the world would they need to be at least a fifth level fighter, a 5th level thief, and a first level druid before becoming a first level Rhymer? Especially in a game that didn't seem to have been designed to support characters going much higher than 14th level or so? (No modules were created early on for levels above that with the exception of Isle of the Ape in 1985, and even though the spellcaster tables go up to 29th level, once most classes hit name level---10th, they stopped accumulating even full hit dice, let alone new powers or abilities.) Bards were effectively the first prestige class in a game system that didn't yet support them. Bards--along with psionics and several items above--are a good example of why the stuff in the Appendices were relegated to the appendices in the first place.


My take: D&D bard was indeed some stupid shit, at least in my games. In the 80’s onward you were lucky if I ran a campaign long enough to get your character to 7th level, so a regular bard would be out. At some point I created a bard subclass of thief that gained skill (in music, performance, and art in addition to some thief skills) as they went up. Due to Andy’s early (and fairly mild) power gaming with this kind of bard at the start of this current campaign, I have altered my bard heavily since he rolled up his character Vaidno (much to his chagrin). I love the Vaidno character nowadays, but my bard class will be a different animal if anyone runs one in the future (although in Andy’s defense, I gave my bard a D4 for hit points, which makes up for almost every other problem with my bard class).

Night Below - Ecology of the Rakshasa

I really thought that after a year and a half of this campaign, I would finally kill at least one character last night. OK, just from that statement you can tell I am not a “killer DM.” After 50 games or so most groups would have experienced some death. Well, with the party facing a crafty and powerful Rakshasa and its Hook Horror cronies, I thought I would get my kill.

Right now the party is in that area of the Night Below setting where Quaggoth and Hook Horrors engage in almost constant conflict over their territory of caves. I should mention that these creature types, and also the eventual “boss monster” of the area, the Rakshasa, are not monsters I have used much in the past. I don’t find quaggoth and hook horrors all that interesting. But I wanted to run some of the Night Below by the book, and I would do so with this section. Also, the quaggoth, as one-time slaves to the drow who once ruled this area (until the drow civilization here was destroyed by an ancient ranger with a magic sword called “Finslayer) were an interesting clue for the groups one drow character to find out more about the people of the old drow city of Sunkenhome. As for the horrors, they were basically thralls of the rakshasa, and therefore made good fodder to weaken the party for the rakshasa fight.

I should mention that the party had found an old stone ziggurat at the entrance to the complex, with drow writing on it. Turns out this was an old wilderness outpost of the drow city below. With there being a drow PC around, I decided to add a little more drow history for the characters to learn of. If you are familiar with the Night Below setting, then you know that the drow are pretty much long gone in this area. Putting in an outpost with some text and graffiti around would add a little drow flavor for the sake of the drow PC, while at the same time keeping the drow-free feeling (refreshing for an Underdark campaign) of the setting.

After some combat, and then parlay, with the quaggoth, the party went on to fight groups of the hook horrors in order to find a rumored horror leader that was able to cast spells and was said to have a vast treasure. This was indeed the rakshasa, who had been appearing to the monsters as an exceptionally strong and magical leader hook horror. While he had the creatures making trips into the tunnels to search for his estranged and marked for death brother (who, according to the module, would be later found by players in the Jubilex Temple area down the tunnels a bit), the rakshasa stayed in a cave lair with this copious treasure trove.

When the party approached his cave, the rakshasa cast a stinking cloud from hiding, and much of the group was temporarily incapacitated. The rakshasa immediately sent in several more horrors to attack the disrupted party, and I had them worried for awhile. But they managed to regroup and destroy the attackers. The party has two magic-users, and they help a lot by casting growth and strength spells on the fighters.

Rushing into the rakshasa lair, they saw three more hook horrors, seemingly guarding a tied and prone female figure. The rakshasa had taken on the appearance of a former party member named “Nutriciia.” The party was none the wiser, and as they attacked the horrors so they could save the girl, she revealed herself as the rakshasa, and snuck up behind a character to sink in claw and fang.

Outside of being a bit weak in melee (claw/claw/bite for 1-3/1-3/2-5) 1st edition rakshasa have killer defenses. Besides ESP and the ability to appear as somebody they see in a victims mind, rakshasa have -4 AC, and are completely immune to any spell below 8th level! Normal weapons do no harm to them, and any magic weapons below +3 only do half damage. They also have access to MU and cleric spells, and in addition to the stinking cloud this rakshasa had a fireball cocked and ready to use. I really thought that 7 dice fireball had a good chance of taking out at least one already wounded character, maybe more.

But he never got to use it. OK, here is the deal. I have my own version of the bard class in my game world. They really are not much like the standard D&D bard, where you have to experience several character classes to truly be called a bard. My class is sort of a thief subclass, but with a set of musical abilities that begin to act like MU spells as they get higher level. The group’s bard, the half elf Vaidno, is one such bard, and he is now getting high level. He recently accessed the “dance” music/spell ability. It is very much like a somewhat powered down version of the 8th level Otto’s Irresistible Dance spell. For one thing, it allows a saving throw. Well, Vaidno got on his mandolin, started playing a serenade for the rakshasa, and even though I gave it a bonus to its save for being a demonic being it failed. There ya go, my boss monster is pretty much helpless for the next 4 rounds. The characters moved in, and even though their magic weapons are modest, they took him down in 3 rounds. Good for them, because he would have blasted the entire area he stood in with his own fireball. That would have for sure killed somebody (pending save).

So my rakshasa didn’t really get to shine, but the party was pretty happy with themselves. They could tell overall that between the hook horrors and the rakshasa, I had finally thrown a possibly deadly fight their way. No more mucking around and running roughshod over my challenges. They are in The Night Below, and they know now that things are really heating up. And as any of you who know Night Below can attest, there are much worse things than rakshasa in this underworld. I’ll get one of those pesky characters next time!

Alignment: great role-playing device, or pain in the ass?

Although I never really used alignment languages or any of the stranger alignment tropes in my 1st e. AD&D games, it still has been an important part of my scenarios. For me it is a great device to get players role-playing, and this more than anything else is where characters tend to have a great variety of personalities, but each must subscribe to certain parameters of behavior. And really, it is part of what makes D&D what it is.

It seems like a minor thing at first in my games, but a player new to my style is often surprised at how seriously I take it when it become an issue. And it became an issue in my game this weekend.

In a nutshell, a chaotic good bard (not classic D&D bard, but one of my own creation that had more to do with music) moved to finish off an evil female half elf spellcaster whom had been (or at least appeared to be) defeated. She was cut-up and had been stung for a few rounds by a druids summon insect spell, and a young female fighter player character had picked her battered body up in her arms out of pity. The bard (also a half elf) was rabidly trying to run the still body through with his longsword, while the female fighter moved and defended to protect it. The fighter put down the girl, and stood her ground as the bard continued to try and attack the prone figure. The girl (apparently) died, so the situation was rendered moot.

OK, so keep in mind that the enemy was a complete bitch, and a thorn in another player characters side for many years, but the bard didn’t know that. He had never heard of her nor fought her before. He only knew that she was the enemy, and that she was a spellcaster. In my opinion, the character was being played with player knowledge as opposed to true role playing, and that is really one of my pet peeves. I’m always surprised at the shamelessness at which many players do this, but that is probably a subject best left to another post.

So the issue for me is: do I have this chaotic good character make an alignment change to chaotic neutral? I always give one free alignment change in a characters life before they get penalized for it. For me, outside of just trying to kill the character later, the only real punishment would be a forced alignment change.

Also somewhat less under consideration was the characters past actions, which were not exactly laudable. Besides often just seeming like a jerk in general, the bard has seduced young women and ignored them the next day (I think the player’s comment then was “why would I talk to her today, I already screwed her” – nice). OK, not really evil, but we aren’t trying to make him evil just for that, or even for trying to kill a helpless enemy. We are talking about not letting him have the term “good” in his alignment description.

I posed this quandary to a chat thread today, and got a very mixed response. Even since the early days of D&D, everyone had their own idea of what is “good and evil.” It is the same today. Here are some comments:

*…Oh, neutral rather than good in any case...However, I wouldn't say that it warrants an allignment change- yet.You can be a real asshole and still be 'good' as long as you are working to benefit society at large before yourself (well, mostly in any case...)Now if he had succeeded in killing off a helpless target and showed no signs of remorse, switching to alignment to neutral might be in order…*

*…Those poor victimized women in your games... :PHow do they normally handle fallen foes in your game? If that was an orc that had taken a hostage and the PC wanted to kill it after it was knocked out, how would you handle that? In your campaigns, do defeated-but-not-killed enemies tend to stay cowed or do they find a way to get back at PCs later?...*

*…In my experience, when everybody but one player (player and PC) wants to not kill an NPC, and that player (player and PC) decides to try to kill the NPC anyway, and it's not something that's discussed out-of-character or anything first, that player is a fucking asshole and will ruin your campaign. I've had this happen to me TWICE. If I ever see another player try it, they're getting kicked out on the first offense, since I warn at the beginning of the campaign not to do this shit. These have only been strangers I've gamed with that do this shit, and they keep doing it after being told repeatedly before and during the game by the GM and all other players that it's not cool and that they should make characters that don't do that kind of thing…So yes, alignment change at the very least. Even if his character had some kind of knowledge that the others didn't, a good-aligned character (regardless of being chaotic) would explain and reason with his friends before trying to traumatize them by murdering a prisoner in front of them (and possibly fighting them as well.) I'd probably ask the player what his problem is and if he perhaps noticed that he's pissing off other players and the GM…*

*…Alignment change. It doesn't hurt to set high standards for goodness…*

*…I'd warn the player that his bard is on the way toward an alignment shift…*

*…I'd ask the damn player. I mean, seriously. "Do you perhaps want to play a neutral character, or did you simply not think the situation through?" Also, I'd point out that as soon as you decide killing people is acceptable for characters with "good" alignment, whether they're unconscious or not is really just quibbling over details…*

*…This does sound like CN behaviour. But I would always ask the player before doing something like that to them.CG: "Hmm. Guys, this bitch just tried to magic us in the face. If we hadn't knocked her out pretty much by accident we'd have killed her without compunction. What are we going to do with her? We can't stab her where she lies. I say we let her come round, point out how easily we beat the crap out of her and tell her to skip the country."CN: *tries to stab evildoer, is told not to do that* "Hey! She'd do that to us if she had the chance. Are you guys really trying to take her as a slave? Can we even afford to keep a slave? *pause* Oh, you're trying to redeem her, or something. OK, but you have to feed her and clean out her cage."CE: *tries to stab evildoer, is told not to* "OK, no problem, but she *is* a caster and so we probably can't meaningfully take her prisoner without muzzling her. Tell you what, I'll cut her tongue out. We can always have it regrown if we need her to tell us something."

Out of all of the replies, I think this one is the most along the lines of my thinking. If the battle is over, there is the luxury of thinking things out for a minute. If your thought process is “fuck the wait, let me stab this bitch” then you are for sure chaotic, but should the term “good” be majorly applied to you?
For me, and my world, it is hard not to think of acts like putting a helpless enemy to the sword on the battlefield, or later cutting out somebodies tongue, sounds more like things a chaotic evil character would do over somebody who says ”hey man, I may be chaotic, but I’m good!”

I just don't think you can put helpless women to the sword (enemy or not) and have "Good" be in your alignment data.

The majority of players are of the "born to fun, loyal to none" attitude, but just because a lot of players and DM's prefer to have their worlds awash in amorality, you can't sell "good" short. Not black and white good and evil, but I think most of us here know the diff. Just because a society or individual thinks raping little girls and drop-kicking babies off cliffs is an acceptable act (Khmer Rouge thought they were doing good), we still need to have established opposites if we are going to use alignments at all. Players should not choose an alignment lightly.

And when considering it, they should realize they should not think of it in terms of modern politics or something, they should think of it in terms of the tropes of fantasy gaming. You are good, you are evil, or you are in-between. The tweeners should not have evil or good as part of their alignments description.