Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ General Gaming _ LOL @ SSI D&D roll playing example in manual

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Oct 2 2007, 04:02 AM

As many of you probably know SSI had made a lot of D&D computer games maybe 10-15 years ago. They had storylines, "journal entries" (flavor text in the manual which the game referred to), NPCs, but their heart and soul was really a D&D combat simulator. All sorts of D&D rules were implemented and if your party was ever wiped out or half the party members died you were plain and simpled screwed. There was no benevolent DM intervention to "keep the story going".

I've found a really old .txt version of the manual for one such game set in the Dragonlance setting and it's been entertaining me. They went and tried to implement various things that are grounded in rules but which are supposed to be in-character stuff (i.e. knights of the sword and knights of the rose have to tithe the vast majority of their take whenever they stop at an outpost, so I assume that they just automatically lose heaps of money whenever they go into town) and yet there's stuff in the manual they're telling you to do which is so munchy and so not believable in terms of role playing.

QUOTE

Building a Successful Party

Forming a strong and adaptable party is a key to success in CHAMPIONS
OF KRYNN. You may place up to six Player Characters in your party. It
is recommended that you use all six characters. A smaller party is
less powerful and more likely to be eliminated by your enemies.

In choosing which characters to include in the party, it is wise to
include a variety of classes: clerics, mages, thieves, and fighters.
At least one party member should be a kender so you may taunt (yell)
in combat and some adventures may only be completed if the party
includes a knight.

One suggested sample party includes:

One Human Knight
One Human White Mage
One Dwarf Ranger
One Kender Cleric of Mishakal/Thief
One Qualinesti Elf Cleric of Shinare/Fighter/Red Mage
One Human Cleric of Majere

Another suggested sample party includes:

One Human Knight
One Silvanesti Elf Cleric of Mishakal/Fighter/White Mage
One Half-Elf Ranger/Cleric of Majere
One Qualinesti Elf Cleric of Shinare/Fighter/Red Mage
One Kender Cleric of Kiri-Jolith/Thief
One Qualinesti Elf Fighter/Red Mage

Why these guys?

CLERIC/FIGHTER/MAGE

The cleric/fighter/mage is the ultimate multi-purpose character. A
cleric/fighter/mage can cast both mage and cleric spells while
wielding the armor and weapons of a fighter. The main disadvantage of
the cleric/fighter/mage is that, as a triple-class character, they
advance in levels quite slowly.

FIGHTER/MAGE

The fighter/mage may cast spells while wearing armor. This split
class can fight as well as a fighter and receives more HP than a pure
mage.

-- Page 10 --

CLERIC/THIEF

A cleric/thief has more HP and a better armor class than a pure thief.
As a cleric, the cleric/thief can cast healing and support spells,
allowing the character to perform double duty as both the party thief
and additional healer. The thief status permits the powerful back stab
attack which is described in the Combat section.

CLERIC

A cleric is essential for healing the party after an engagement. The
most efficient way to heal is to Encamp and select FIX (you can issue
this command several times while encamping). Fix works as follows:

If a cleric is in the party, all available cure spells are cast until
characters are healed. If the party has taken more damage than
clerics have cure spells, the fix option may be used again. When fix
is used, characters at the top of the list will be healed before the
characters below them.

If a cleric is not in the party, HP may be recovered through rest (1
HP per 24 hour period), potions or Temple services.

RANGER

Rangers normally start the game with more HP than other fighter types.
They do extra damage versus giant type monsters.

KNIGHT

Knights are powerful fighters and are necessary to complete some
quests. There are some magic items that may only be used by knight
characters.

MIXED CLASS

Mixed class characters in general are very valuable for their many
skills and are worth the slower rate at which they will advance in
levels.

Bolds mine, obviously.

I like how in the manual they flat out tell you that mixed classes are usually better than single classes instead of even pretending that someone might consider making, say, a straight up fighter because that is easier to imagine someone pursuing than a triple multiclass.

I cannot even begin to wrap my mind around a CLERIC/FIGHTER/MAGE without completely shifting out of believable characterization and totally into straight up number crunching. Consider the following points:

1.) Clerics are devoted to religious belief and faith and as part of this faith in D&D land they aren't allowed to use edged weapons. BUT apparently there's no problem with being both a cleric and a fighter who uses edged weapons. Why is that "okay" but it's not possible for a single-class cleric to grab a steak knife and stab someone in self-defense during a tavern assault?

2.) Mages cannot wear armor in D&D land. If a mage expects that he's going to be jumped coming around a corner by Jason from Friday the 13th he can't put on a chain mail shirt under his robes. BUT he can as long as he claims he has at least 1 level in Fighter.

How can we even begin to justify such a character background in our imaginations? "Well, uh, yeah...Juggly the CLERIC/FIGHTER/MAGE started out studying as a mage. As soon as he became a level 1 mage some red headed bully beat the crap out of him after absorbing Juggly's Magic Missile Spell which rolled poorly and only did 2 points of damage. As a reaction to this Juggly went and trained as a fighter for 1 level. But after he accidentally killed someone in fighter training school he found religion and became a cleric. But he can still bust out the edged weapons when he needs to. Or cast Magic Missile. While wearing armor. And of course he has no problem finding training in clericness, fighterness, or mageness whenever he needs it. Because he's just that popular with so many people."

If one triple-classed character can do all sorts of things which are forbidden to other character classes such as actually wear armor it almost makes the other characters look mentally handicapped. Perhaps the mage, should he attempt to put on armor, immediately lets out a high-pitched whiney noise and falls to the ground with a clatter completely unable to move or gesticulate. Perhaps if you wish to capture an enemy mage you just need to hold him down and pull some armor on him to render him totally helpless.

If I were writing the rules, I'd put a lot of restrictions on a multi-class character. In the first place, if the system allowed for a certain number of maximum levels (eg. level 20, or level 36) I would make the total of all your levels count towards the maximum number of levels. So if 36 were our max the best that a triple class character could be in one area would be level 34 and two level 1 classes, or level 12 in three areas if the levels were spread out evenly. I really don't feel like a triple class character should be "better" than a specialist especially if he's "better" just because he breaks the rules better. A generalist should be a bit more versatile but should always suck in a specific area compared to a specialist.

If a boxer, a specialist, fought in a mixed martial arts venue without modifying his training regime, he would not do well compared to people who train for the mixed martial arts venue. However, someone who trains for mixed martial arts who enters a straight up boxing venue will, all other things being equaled, be out-boxed by the guy who has specialized in boxing his whole life. Just look at the boxing match Leila Ali versus Erin Toughill from a while back. Even though Toughill was a seasoned MMA competitor Leila Ali completely dominated her in the boxing ring because Ali was more appropriately specialized.

The other thing I would do is enforce class restrictions while doing class activities. So if you're a FIGHTER/CLERIC/MAGE, I'd have the following restrictions just in the interest of not completely contradicting previous class rules from before the days of multiclassing:

1.) You cannot cast magic if you're wearing any armor. If you're wearing plate mail and suddenly really feel the need to Fireball you have to rip off your armor in order to do so.

2.) Because clerical spells and abilities essentially come from faith you cannot use any of your cleric abilities (spells or Turn Undead) if you are using edged weapons. You can use your fighter stats with blunt weapons but your cleric spells in memory immediately vanish if you use an edged weapon and you cannot regain your lost cleric abilities until you've done proper atonement for having used edged weapons. The atonement would have to be pretty serious considering that clerics aren't even supposed to use edged weapons when their lives are threatened.

I think that rules like that would go a long way towards having multiclassed characters be a true "jack of all trades but master of none" instead of being stupidly all powerful.

Multi classing just makes my head explode. I'll bet it was created by some whiny player who didn't understand why his mage wasn't allowed to pick up a sword and practice fencing on the weekend and eventually mushroomed into some gigantic game-balance-destroying suspension-of-disbelief-eating monstrosity.

Posted by: Cthulhudreams Oct 2 2007, 05:46 AM

In reality though being a fighter/mage/cleric is a great plan because for the same amount of training you got to be like 6/6/6 and the pure mage was only level 8 in his discipline.

Though in normal D&D a fighter/mage was lumbered with not being able to cast spells in armour.

I disagree with you about multiclassing. If we fast foward to D&D 3rd ed, the concepts that rule the roost are single class Wizard/Druid/Clerics, and the fighters need to multiclass like a Ritalin popping 8 year old to have any chance of keeping up.

Posted by: hyzmarca Oct 2 2007, 01:28 PM

One of my favorite D&D games is Eye of the Beholder, which is an earnest attempt to create a real-time 3D representation of D&D dungeon crawling and combat.
Unfortunatly, due to the real time 3D nature of the game, mages are totally useless and clerics are only good for certain buffs, which aren't particularly useful, and downtime healing, which can be accomplished via a great deal of rest. It just takes too long to open the spell menu and choose one in combat. And because XP tends to be handed out sparingly at lower levels of the dungeon, multi-classed characters are at an extreme disadvantage. In fact, the ultimate combat party in Eye of the Beholder consists of four Dexterity 18 halfling thieves dual-wielding +3 rocks because very few enemies have ranged attacks and those few ranged attacks that you will face are easily sidesteped (Enemies, meanwhile, can't sidestep). This presents the rather absurd scenario of four halflings pelting a fearsome Beholder that commanded an entire dungeon full of minions, ran a far-reaching criminal conspiracy, and threatened to conquer or destroy the entire city of Waterdeep to death with rocks. While sidesteping all of his eyebeams and taunting him about it.
This is made even funnier by the fact that the in -game text and strategy guides make a huge deal about the fact that the only way to defeat the beholder is to use a unique magic wand made from one of it's eyestalks that only worlk against it, but attempting to kill it with the wand (by pushing it back into one of its own traps, the wand doesn't actually do any damage) will almost certain result in many PC deaths if not a TPK, which the halflink thief sidestep technique works perfectly every time.

Posted by: Aku Oct 2 2007, 01:37 PM

hmm thats odd, its been a long time since i've had an early edition dnd book, but i seem to remember that cross classed characters like that still had to abide by any absolute restrictions (like the clerics) but like i said, its been a long time....

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Oct 2 2007, 10:59 PM

QUOTE (Cthulhudreams)

In reality though being a fighter/mage/cleric is a great plan because for the same amount of training you got to be like 6/6/6 and the pure mage was only level 8 in his discipline.

For me, this suggests something of a logical or conceptual flaw with the way EXP levels work.

The reason that the triple multiclass character isn't far behind the singe class character is because of how the EXP required to level up gets bigger and bigger as you go up in levels while the amount of potency you gain from just one level isn't very much, especially if you're a fighter. There's a serious point of diminishing returns as you go up in levels.

Why did they decide to do it that way? There are a few probable reasons. The first reason is reward mechanic. The game is designed to have a continually increasing reward mechanic in terms of numbers of EXPs you gain for overcoming various challenges but in order to prevent levelling from speeding up as character level increases they backdoor-undermine that by making more and more EXPs required for gaining levels as those levels go up. The second reason could be the idea that continual refinements to skill begin to require disproportional amounts of input on the part of the character. So it's harder to go from level 35 to level 36 than it is to go from level 1 to level 5, even though level 1 to level 5 is a much more dramatic difference. This is because the level 35 fighter is just refining the nuances of his craft which is already very refined, and that refinement is simultaneously hard to achieve and also doesn't make that big of a difference in reality.

If we look at EXP requirements that way, though, I would argue that it creates a problem of unused excess capacity for single class characters. If a multi class character can become very good at three disciplines in the time it takes a single class character to go from very good to very good plus one it seems like the single class character is simply not using his time efficiently, especially when we consider that it's possible for a multi class character to have the same level in a given class as a single class character. Under this way of handling multi class characters it seems that single class characters are effectively wasting a lot of time refining a single skill to a small extent instead of picking up a variety of skills and getting good if not excellent at all of them.

In terms of verisimilitude and thinking about the way things work in the real world, someone who works on three disciplines isn't going to end up only slightly worse at one of them than the specialist. All things being equal the specialist should be a lot better if we don't want to have to assume that the specialist is wasting all this time on mostly-academic refinements and has all this excess capacity that he was simply too stupid to put to use like the multi-classer was.

As a mental exercise, then, how would I consider modifying the way D&D works in order to relfect more favorably on someone who chooses to specialize in a way that I feel is more in tune with reality?

I think the easiest way to do this would be to not make levels have a point of diminishing returns in terms of EXP. At the same time, though, EXP should be awared by the GM not on a strict monster-by-monster basis, but rather on the same scale throughout the campaign based on how challenging a situation was for the party. With a flat scale for EXP rewards and non-inflated gaps between the amount of EXP required per level you'd be able to eliminate the situation where as levels increase the triple class character is only one step behind the specialist instead of only 1/3 of where the specialist has attained.

The other thing I might consider is applying a more drastic total level cap to the maximum level a character can attain which gets worse for each additional character class the character adds. This would represent how by spreading his time and energy among multiple disciplines the multi class character can never end up refining things to the degree of perfection of a specialist, since additional refinements upon mastery require the complete and total devotion of the specialist. So for example maybe the maximum level of a specialist would be 36, but the sum total of all the levels for a multiclass character might be only 30 for two classes, and 24 for three classes.

This was just a mental exercise, of course. I realize that the reason why 1st ed rocks is precisely broken mechanics, convoluted rules, huge tables, and ORIENTAL ADVENTURES 1ST EDITION!!!!!!

Posted by: Cthulhudreams Oct 3 2007, 03:52 AM

QUOTE (Wounded Ronin @ Oct 2 2007, 05:59 PM)

QUOTE (Cthulhudreams @ Oct 2 2007, 12:46 AM)

In reality though being a fighter/mage/cleric is a great plan because for the same amount of training you got to be like 6/6/6 and the pure mage was only level 8 in his discipline.

This is a problem with fighters, no the mechanic.

The underlying problem is this.

Going from level 16 ->17 as a wizard gives you timestop and shapeshift.

Going from levels 16 -> 17 as a fighter gives you +1 to hit.

Frankly a level 10 wizard / 10 fighter in 3rd edition is in no way as powerful as a level 17 wizard. Or, hell, probably even a cheesy level 13 one.

But a level 17 cleric is probably BETTER than a level 17 wizard, so lets do the breakdown there.

A level 17 wizard is much, much, better than a Wizard 11/ Cleric 11. Even the cheesy 13 wizard with 7th level spells may be a valid choice compared to those 11 levels of cleric.

So we can see that those 11 cleric levels are worth considerably less than 5 or 6 wizard levels.

So the sliding XP scale in D&D 1st is actually pretty good, because it does reflect that a wizard 5/cleric 5 is absolute rubbish compared to a wizard 10. Problems with diminishing returns are because fighters are a crap class, not with sliding xps scales.

Where the sliding xps scales are broke are when you can have a level 5 thief and a level 5 fighter together in the same party at the same xps, and a level 6 thief and a level 5 fighter in the same part together.

Err.. how are those two on the same power level again?

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Oct 3 2007, 09:10 PM

That seems to be a very good explanation, Cthulu.

So it would seem that if somebody wanted to revise D&D to make a straight up fighter "balanced" on some level with a magic-using multiclass, that person would have to change the level advancement scheme for fighters so that the amount of bonuses a fighter gained for going up a level were roughly equivalent with the amount of EXP required for that level. For example, going from level 1 to level 2, requiring very little EXP, might only net that +1 to hit and 1d8 plus hitpoints, but going from 35 to 36, requiring IIRC millions of EXP would provide a very large to-hit bonus, a very large increase to HP, and perhaps some additional special abilities related to Conanesque hardassery such as a certain degree of damage resistance.

The way I see it it's the Sonny Chiba asian cinema hero paradigm; this actually works pretty well with the original 1970s backdrop of D&D and especially well when we consider the hardcore orientalism of Oriental Adventures 1st ed. If a fighter reaches truly epic levels of power his skills have transcended the physical levle and are now broaching the wishy-washy pseudophilosophical level. I can see a fighter on the level of a mythical hero developing all sorts of supernatural-seeming abilities drawn from a variety of folk tales, mythological legends, movies, and things like that. Some ideas for powers fighters might gain which aren't technically magical but which would make them not get totally left behind by the multiclassed Fighter/Cleric/Mage.

*Zen-like mastery of the cosmic essence of swinging a blade allows the fighter to injure supernatural beings as though he were wielding a +X weapon, and there could be a series of these bonuses with bigger and bigger net +Xes as levels go up. The fighter has learned how to cut the Buddha he encounters on the road in half. Or, to quote a Sonny Chiba film where he plays the role of Yagyu Jubei and has to contend with a demonic Shiro Amakusa, "If you swing at a demon, it will be cut. If you swing at a devil, it will be cut!" A maximum level fighter perhaps can at least injure an immortal although there's no guarantees about actually winning that battle.

*If a fighter's level becomes high enough he causes Fear like some monsters do. This is due partially to reputation but also due to the fact that the person looks superhumanly scary and murderous when you look in his eyes. You think for a moment you've just glimpsed the reaper.

*Hard-as-nails heroes who take inordinate amounts of punishment but just keep on hanging in there are a cliche of modern action cinema. Look at Sonny Chiba, Arhnold in Conan the Barbarian, or even Die Hard. If a fighter becomes a very high level he can gain various degrees of damage resistance. If he's reduced to zero hitpoints or below he's got a certain % chance of falling to the ground apparently defeated but somehow still retaining 1 hitpoint. Maybe this % gets bigger as the level goes up.

*Philosophical kensai-cowboys and fearless samurai are portrayed in legends as having superhuman self-control and universla perspective which allows them to transcend ordinary difficulties and fears. High level fighters get very good saving throws against magical illusions, fear effects, and various other saving throws.

Posted by: mfb Oct 3 2007, 09:51 PM

i dunno, i see a lot of good builds that have a lot of levels of fighter. sure, straight-up fighters are rare, because the fighter class is mainly good for getting a lot of feats in very short order--it's basically designed to be multiclassed out of. that puts it in a much better place than, say, the sorcerer, who you basically have to be retarded not to multiclass out of at the first opportunity. sorcerers get spell progression and a familiar--and that's it. multiclassing into a PrC with full spell progression nets you all the cool stuff a sorcerer gets plus whatever cool abilities the PrC itself bestows. sorcerers are way, way crappier a class than fighters.

Posted by: Critias Oct 4 2007, 03:57 AM

Which is the core issue that's either good or bad (depending on how you view classes) about the 3.x edition multiclassing rules compared to previous ones.

When there are classes that are just plain better or undeniably worse than other classes, something is either very wrong or it's just "how it's meant to be played" and you've got to just accept that not all classes are equal, so not all levels are equal, so not every experience point is created equal, so the level based system is fundamentally flawed as a means of gauging power level and experience.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Oct 4 2007, 04:22 PM

The best builds are second ninja-foo multiclasses (remember, you can't single-class a ninja). It's the second one, because the first one always gets found out as a ninja, loses 40 (or 60?) points of honor, and commits seppuku.

~J

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Oct 4 2007, 09:35 PM

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

Yeah, I remember the ninja class and how you were forced to try and masquerade as another character class. What fun.

Ultimately we never needed 2nd or 3rd edition. 1st edition was completely adequate.

One of my dreams is to be able to play in a first edition Oriental Adventures campaign and go around assaulting people with my chopsitcks that do 1d3 damage.

Posted by: darthmord Oct 5 2007, 04:07 PM

WR, one thing you failed to mention in your OP is that the rules for nearly all SSI D&D games (which were 2nd edition btw) is that they ENFORCED level limits.

So sure, you could have that F/M/T and the F/M/C but you'd be limited to level 8 or 10 as a fighter, 12 as a mage, and 16 or 18 as a Thief.

Oh and your exp is divided by 3 even if you max out one class and can no longer advance.

The last time I played the Dragonlance SSI games, my multiclass characters were maxed out in short order (shortly after I imported them into the 2nd game of the trilogy) while my single class characters continued to grow in power. My Knight of the Rose was level 40 in the 3rd game and she was a beastly tank. My FMT & FMC both had issues with survivability despite having the best possible stats and gear. They simply lacked the staying power due to level restricting HP gain.

Also, Clerics of Kiri-Jolith were allowed to use edged weapons as a bonus from their deity. I believe Clerics of Paladine could do the same. Not every cleric has the same restrictions on usable weapons.

BTW, iirc the differential between single class vs 2x multiclass vs 3x multiclass was single vs 2x, the single would typically be +3 levels. Such that a 5/5 Fighter / Mage would have about the same exp as a level 8 mage. The triple class character would be around 3/3/4 with the single class being around level 8 or so.

That's what made a lot of difference in 2nd edition in terms of power. Level restrictions based on demihumans (what non-humans were called). Which was a tad incongruous as Elves were supposed to be the masters of magic yet had level limits that Humans did not...

But in honesty, there are several restrictions that your OP glossed over or flat out didn't mention. These things you wouldn't notice unless you played the games. The manuals were less than... complete.

But talking about the Dragonlance Trilogy SSI games makes me want to go home and fire them up (yes I still have them and they do work nicely under XP Pro SP2).

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Oct 5 2007, 10:00 PM

Thanks for the heads-up. Shoot man, it makes me wonder if I should start over having only single class characters so as to be in good shape towards the end of the story arc, when you put it that way. I could catass power-level in the very beginning of the game to overcome the initial suckitude of single-class characters...

Posted by: Kagetenshi Oct 9 2007, 07:47 PM

QUOTE (darthmord)

That's what made a lot of difference in 2nd edition in terms of power. Level restrictions based on demihumans (what non-humans were called). Which was a tad incongruous as Elves were supposed to be the masters of magic yet had level limits that Humans did not...

Imagine you're a thousand-year-old Elf who has been sitting at the level cap for the last eight hundred years. Now you see this human upstart about to pass you after only forty.

A quick word with your thousand-year-old Elf mage buddies, an evening of work, and suddenly there isn't any human upstart anymore.

And that's how you keep a reputation going.

~J

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Oct 9 2007, 11:26 PM

QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

QUOTE (darthmord @ Oct 5 2007, 11:07 AM)

Logically speaking it's interesting that certain character classes were restricted by your randomly generated ability scores (i.e. in order to be a Monk you needed certain minimum ability scores) but that the same logic didn't apply to elves, dwarves, etc even though they were supposed to be relatively rare and humans common.

To be logically consistient maybe the rules should have had you roll up your attributes first, pick species second based on certain minimum entry level restrictions (i.e. no elves with Wisdom 3) and then finally pick your twinked out character class.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Oct 10 2007, 01:05 AM

Eh, I can see that approach, but I think it makes more sense this way—being a different race means your "Ideal Form" (which of course is a human) is modified in some way, so it's a set of adjustments to your base nature. Your class is just what you do, or what you're suited to do.

An argument that's somewhat weakened by the fact that hit dice are based on class, but what're you going to do.

~J

Posted by: Sammiel Oct 11 2007, 12:52 PM

I still own Strahd's Possession, Stone Prophet, and Menzoberranzen. Great games.