|
Post by foster1941 on Jan 10, 2005 14:17:04 GMT -5
Good. The party had better include somebody pretty, Foster, cause my half-orc can curdle milk just by looking at it. Foster's quite right about cleric/thieves, pre-UA you're restricted to half-orcs. My bad. Cleric/thief and edged weapons is an interesting question and I'm curious about the source of Foster's information. I'd read the PHB page 32, which states that "Cleric combinations (with fighter types) may use edged weapons" and I originally ruled that since a thief isn't a fighter, the cleric/thief would have the weapon restrictions of both cleric and thief. My player pointed out that this meant (in practical terms) that his only weapon choice was Club, and I agreed that this was unfair. I house-ruled that he had the cleric weapon restrictions but not the thief ones. But Foster's had access to sources I didn't (including the Dragon magazine, which I couldn't get in the UK at the time) so he might very well be aware of a ruling I missed. I'm going by memory of the way I've always done it, and don't have any books in front of me. The quote you point out is interesting, and I agree that your reading seems most literally correct, but I don't think that was the actual intention -- I think EGG had just forgotten about cleric/thieves and cleric/assassins at the time that parenthetical statement was written (remember that in OD&D half-orcs, cleric/thieves, and cleric/assassins didn't exist, so the only multiclassed clerics were NPC dwarf cleric/ftrs and elf cleric/ftr/m-us, and half-elf cleric/ftr/m-us). At any rate, AFAIK this was never clarified officially anywhere, so I suppose it's MrE's judgment call...
|
|
|
Post by blackprinceomuncie on Jan 10, 2005 14:19:01 GMT -5
I had believed that elven fighter/magic-users can cast spells in elven chain, but otherwise no magic-user spells in armour. I think the only reference to this in the PHB is the top paragraph of page 33. You're mixing the rules for dual-classing and multiclassing. The paragraph on dual-class characters at the top of page 33 doesn't reference elven chain specifically, it says that a human dual-class fighter/M-U cannot cast spells while wearing armor as can a multiclassed elf fighter/M-U. Dual class characters cannot mix class functions, even after they have achieved level parity between their two classes, multiclass characters can mix class functions at all times (except for the restrictions against thieves performing thief functions while in non-thief armor). Any limitations to multiclass M-Us casting in armor, with exceptions involving elfin chain didn't arise until 2e AFAIK.
|
|
|
Post by foster1941 on Jan 10, 2005 14:22:35 GMT -5
What kind of spells and abilities am I giving up to be a non-human? If I can only get to level 5 cleric, I am assuming I am sacrificing the majority of my high level spell casting ability. Am I wrong? How many levels of spells are there, and how many spell levels can I learn with a maximum cleric level of 5? Cleric spells go up to level 7. A 5th level cleric gets 1 3rd level spell and no spells of levels 4-7 (although he could still use them from scrolls, if available). In the long term this is a major drawback, but assuming you're multiclassed it will take awhile before you get to that point. IMO there is NO reason to play a single-classed half-elf cleric in 1E.
|
|
Ant
Novice
Posts: 39
|
Post by Ant on Jan 10, 2005 14:35:06 GMT -5
I guess I am looking at all 7 levels of cleric spells vs multi-classing to be a better fighter. It seems like I can have a better character either in the short run or long run. I guess since I have never played 1e, I should probably go with the better short term character so I might one day survive to experience the long term
|
|
|
Post by PapersAndPaychecks on Jan 10, 2005 14:37:32 GMT -5
There are 7 levels of cleric spells. They are achieved at:-
Level 1 cleric - Level 1 spells Level 3 cleric - Level 2 spells (so the maximum for half-orc clerics is level 2 spells) Level 5 cleric - Level 3 spells (so the maximum for half-elf clerics is level 3 spells) Level 7 cleric - Level 4 spells Level 9 cleric - Level 5 spells Level 12 cleric - Level 6 spells Level 14 cleric - Level 7 spells
You need a Wisdom score of 18 to cast level 7 spells, and a Wisdom of 17 or greater to cast level 6 spells.
Level 1 spells include the basic heal ("Cure Light Wounds.") This is the best heal which half-orcs or half-elves will ever get, since the next heal up ("Cure Serious Wounds") is level 4. Other things that half-orcs and half-elves cannot do include, for example, raising the dead or "turning" the more powerful undead monsters.
If we play the game to high level, it's quite a big deal.
|
|
|
Post by PapersAndPaychecks on Jan 10, 2005 15:07:45 GMT -5
Aye, the judgment call quote encapsulates the problem. AD&D 1e's a game which has been so extensively revised and house-ruled that after 20+ years of play, we just get used to our own house rules. For example, few DM's seem use psionics for player characters. Nobody in this forum's even bothered to ask. And things I was sure were official rules sometimes turn out to be house rules made 20 years ago to clarify some ambiguity. Looking over the PHB I see that BPOM is apparently correct, at least if you read "cast spells in armour" to mean "cast spells in any kind of armour you like." I have no idea where the idea about elven chain came from. I can only conclude that this is something my own gaming group decided on so long ago that I'd forgotten anyone might rule it differently... it's not like there are DM's from outside my own gaming group to chat with, here in Britain. Letting multiclass magic-users wear plate armour certainly changes things considerably. It makes cleric/magic-user and fighter/magic-users into much more attractive options.
|
|
|
Post by foster1941 on Jan 10, 2005 15:15:12 GMT -5
I have no idea where the idea about elven chain came from. I can only conclude that this is something my own gaming group decided on so long ago that I'd forgotten anyone might rule it differently... it's not like there are DM's from outside my own gaming group to chat with, here in Britain. I'm not sure where that idea originally came from but it seems to be a very widespread "AD&D cultrual meme." Lots of people nowadays assume that since that rule's in 2E that anyone who uses it must've gotten it from there, but I think the reverse is actually true -- that the reason it was included in 2E is because so many people were already using it. At any rate, though, the official 1E rule is that elf and half-elf cleric/m-us, ftr/m-us, and c/f/m-us can wear any kind of armor.
|
|
|
Post by PapersAndPaychecks on Jan 10, 2005 16:01:22 GMT -5
Hehe, this got me so intrigued that I got out my adventure module collection and hunted through it.
I've used modules to resolve rule queries before. Up until the mid 1990's, I did not allow druids a Wisdom-related spell bonus (because it said "bonuses for clerics" not "bonuses for clerics and druids" or "bonuses for priests.") The player pointed to the NPC druid character from Dungeon Module T1: The Village of Hommlet and showed me that Gygax allowed druids a wisdom spell bonus, and I relented.
Anyway, the first relevant module I looked up was D1-2: Descent into the Depths of the Earth, and I checked the character listings there. There are no less than three fighter/magic-users in that party of nine characters, and they are wearing plate, splint, and chain.
Nice ability score rolls on that party too. One of them's got three 18's and no ability score under 15...
In any case, it's clear to me now that Gygax allowed fighter/magic-users in plate, but looking at that party confused me further, because it contains a level 9 half-elf ranger and a level 7 grey elf cleric.
Those characters must date from around 1977, but I'd thought level 7 elven clerics were a UA concept. Maybe Mr Gygax originally allowed elven clerics, then banned them between 1978 and about 1983, then reallowed them again?
|
|
|
Post by AxeMental on Jan 10, 2005 16:07:09 GMT -5
A couple points: Foster wrote: " Lots of people nowadays assume that since that rule's in 2E that anyone who uses it must've gotten it from there, but I think the reverse is actually true -- that the reason it was included in 2E is because so many people were already using it."
Thats an excellent point, I remember alot of stuff we did before 2E came out (some of which we new were house rules) that became official in 2E (though most of 2E changes supported a theme we had nothing to do with). The fact that we have to piece together the game from the core books, old Dragons, modules, etc. was a problem and led to multiple interp of basic rules, etc. Yet that need to "search" was the motivation behind alot of people actually reading through crap they might have otherwise passed over. I really don't think the game would be as good as it is if it wasn't for confusion, that allowed us (esp. the DM) to take ownership of it which was the intent of Master G all along. The fact is AD&D has a certain aliveness and living spirit that no other game before or since has managed to equal. EGG has claimed this was intentional all along on his part, but I doubt that, it seems more like osmosis.
|
|
|
Post by northrundicandus on Jan 10, 2005 16:22:46 GMT -5
Dammit. You guys are not supposed to have interesting posts in the Play by Post forum! I've been ignoring them. Now I have to start reading this section.
|
|
|
Post by foster1941 on Jan 10, 2005 16:22:50 GMT -5
I've used modules to resolve rule queries before. Up until the mid 1990's, I did not allow druids a Wisdom-related spell bonus (because it said "bonuses for clerics" not "bonuses for clerics and druids" or "bonuses for priests.") The player pointed to the NPC druid character from Dungeon Module T1: The Village of Hommlet and showed me that Gygax allowed druids a wisdom spell bonus, and I relented. That's included in the official Dragon magazine errata, but before I knew that it got me too. I actually had a character who was a half-elf druid who didn't have bonus spells, and who died. When I saw that in the errata the first thing I thought was "man, if I'd known this at the time I bet that character of mine would've lived!" In general, using module pregen characters as a way to divine intention is a double-edged sword. Sometimes it can help, but I've found that just as often pregen characters in modules have errors -- like the level 9 half-elf ranger in D1-2. ISTR some 'broken' pregen characters in some of the other modules too (S1 maybe?).
|
|
|
Post by PapersAndPaychecks on Jan 10, 2005 16:31:20 GMT -5
P&P's second law of the game of Messageboard:- interesting posts only arise in obscure forums.
The funniest thread I ever read in my life was called "How elves have sex" (it wasn't all that graphic, but absolutely hilarious) - but it was tucked away in a hidden forum on an obscure site and only about a dozen people ever read it...
|
|
|
Post by rebecca on Jan 17, 2005 18:41:22 GMT -5
Hello, this is Rose, aka Andy, aka Rebecca, aka Tate aka Smurf aka Purple Kitten or any other such handle you know me by.
Real name, i'm not even sure my self...
If you can handle a mellodramatic neurotic non-Goth non-Townie who doesn't own a single D&D rulebook and who's dice are currently packed in his/her/its loft ready for a house move that isn't going to happen, then i'm in.
I like to play priesty type characters out of prefference, or at least a spell caster. 'though I hate illusionists (and indeed anyone who is a fake) because they only have 1 usefull spell until they reach billionth level (and I cant walk around having cast "a pair of lovely jubbleys" and keep concentration).
Other than that, i'll play anything.
PS: I read how Elves have sex, and if I wasn't a candidate for a section 10 order / the Royal family before - then I am now.
|
|
Ant
Novice
Posts: 39
|
Post by Ant on Jan 18, 2005 7:54:30 GMT -5
Hey Rebecca, I'm Ant as you can tell. Welcome aboard Don't feel bad, I don't have any rulebooks or dice either.
|
|
|
Post by AxeMental on Jan 18, 2005 22:03:58 GMT -5
Greetings, don't loose those dice during the move!
|
|