bryan@uiuccsb.UUCP (03/20/84)
#N:uiuccsb:7900007:000:1246 uiuccsb!bryan Mar 19 21:36:00 1984 A few questions for the knowledgable sages on the net: For the double, triple, etc damage done by a thief on a backstab would you double just the damage done by the weapon or the adjusted damage i.e. the damage done by the weapon plus any strength bonus plus any magical bonus? Is there a passage in the DM that specifically says that when lesser undead are under the control of a powerful undead that the powerful undead must be turned first before the lesser undead can be turned? What if the powerful undead was unturnable then would the minions also then become unturnable because he was unturnable? Also concerning undead turning - what happens if a neutral cleric ( lawful- neutral or chaotic-neutral) turns an undead -- is the undead destroyed or does it become friendly (assuming the cleric is high enough that he has a D on the turning chart) ? Finnally concerning a ring of regeneration - if someone drops below zero hit points ( -10 equaling death) and then a ring of regeneration is put on the person -- does he gain the effects as if he had it on before, or are the effects delayed but eventually come, or is he S.O.L. ? Thanks for the comments, w not d, Rob Bryan
wade@nmtvax.UUCP (03/21/84)
This is how I run it in my world, but I'm sure there are those
who would do it differently.
As for multiple damage for backstabbing, I have the player figure out
the total damage he would do normally and multiply it by his backstabbing
capability. For example, a thief backstabs with a dagger, the dagger does
3 points, the thief gets a +1 for strength, and a +1 magical bonus on the
dagger. So he does a total of 5 points and gets triple damage on backstabs,
thus doing 15 points.
Lesser undead can be turned no matter who's controlling them. An undead
creature under the control of another creature is not an extension of
that creature, and is not protected by that creature. There is nothing
in the DMG that says otherwise.
Neutral clerics could feasibly choose to either destroy or control
undead upon which they get a 'D' result, but it is dependent on the
leaning of their diety. A cleric who works for a god of death or
something similar would probably keep the undead around, but a cleric
that works for the god of wild sex parties would probably wipe the
foul creature off the face of the earth.
In my world, a ring of regeneration always works to fix up anyone
wearing it at a steady rate, with no delay in start-up time. Rings
of regeneration work as a trolls regeneration works, even after death.
So if a character goes to -11 and is wearing the ring, he will still
come back, but normally by that time, his slayers will have either
eaten him or stripped his body of everything valuable, including the
ring.
Richard Wade
nmtvaxkaufman@uiucdcs.UUCP (kaufman ) (03/22/84)
#R:uiuccsb:7900007:uiucdcs:9300025:000:800
uiucdcs!kaufman Mar 21 10:25:00 1984
Answers to the best of my offhand knowledge:
1) The damage on a backstab is multiplied after all modifiers are added.
If a 7th level thief with an 18 strength and a +2 dagger rolls 3 points
of damage, we get 3 + 2 (strength) + 2 (weapon) = 7 * 3 = 21 points of
damage.
2) Re: Clerics turning multiple undead types - I'm not sure, but I know it's
clearly stated in the DMG.
3) Probably depends on the DM - I've seen undead turned away as if by a good
cleric, but the DMG indicates that neutral clerics make the undead disint-
erested in the party. But if you are the DM, do it whatever way suits you
and your party.
4) Sorry, can't help you here.
Unlike other things, I am not a trademark of TSR Hobbies.
Ken Kaufman (uiucdcs!kaufman)tomj@dartvax.UUCP (Thomas Johnston) (03/25/84)
Concerning Thief multiplier damage, you multiply ONLY the number on the
die roll. For example, a fifth level thief with Gauntlets of Ogre Power
wielding a +1, +1 dagger and backstabbing would do
X = (d4) * 3 + 6 + 1
(d4) is the weapon damage, 3 is the backstab multiplier, 6 is the strength
bonus, and 1 the weapon damage bonus.
The expected value of an attack like this is E(X) = 7.5 + 6 + 1 = 14.5
If the multiplier were applied to everything,
Y = (d4 + 6 + 1) * 3
then the expected value of the attack is E(Y) = 9.5 * 3 = 28.5.
Tom Johnston
{linus, cornell, decvax}!dartvax!tomjgrindal@utcsrgv.UUCP (David Grindal) (03/27/84)
In my games, ALL the damage is multiplied. It does make sense in terms of the game. To use T. Johnton's example, a 5th level thief with gauntlets of ogre power has an expected damage of 28 on a backstab. Don't you think that a 5th level thief with that strength would kill most 4th or 5th level characters (3rd level fighters) on a clear backstab. I do. What it comes down to, is that it depends on the GM, as all good things do. One catch that I have is that I don't always give the full multiplier. If someone is surprised fine, the thief gets his 3X,4X, or whatever. But if it was't a clear backstab (e.g. someone screams a warning just as the blade descends, the victim "feel" something funny, etc.) I sometimes reduce 3X to 2X, or 4X to 3X and so on. Another point to ponder is this. What about thieves with a high dex who use two weapons. Can they use both on backstab? Get strength additions on both? Get full multiplier for both? Let's hear some discussion about this. David Grindal ..!utzoo!grindal
wade@nmtvax.UUCP (03/29/84)
For thieves who use two weapons, it is not feasible to attack simultaniously
with both weapons. When two weapons are used, one is normally a parrying
weapon and is used in the weaker hand. The parrying weapon gets only
half of the characters regular strength bonus, and when two weapons are
used, there are penalties to both weapons given in the DMG. I allow
a character to attack with either their main weapon or their parrying
weapon, but not both. A character may attack with a weapon while at the
same time parrying with the other, this is the whole purpose of carrying
two weapons.
Richard Wade
nmtvaxfaustus@ucbvax.UUCP (Wayne Christopher) (03/29/84)
Of course a thief can use two weapons in a backstab... So if you happen to have a 12th level thief with a dex of 18 and gauntlets of ogre power and a +4 sword and a +3 dagger and a potion of speed (I once did) you would get a maximum of 240 points per shot... Not counting poison... Wayne
leeway@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Lee Gold) (03/29/84)
D&D/AD&D Thieves with a High Dex (there are other kinds?) should definitely be able to use two one-handed weapons. (It's called fighting Florentine, I think.) Personally I'd drop their dex-based AC bonus while doing so. I would give them secret strike bonus on both attacks AND full STR bonus. The problem is that most FRPGames don't have a way of handling multiple actions within the rules. Certainly, if a D&D/AD&D lion can claw/claw/bite in your game all in one round, the thief should be able to stab/stab with a dagger and sword (or two daggers). In LANDS OF ADVENTURE now supposedly available at your local game store from Fantasy Games Unlimited (and written by me, she typed modestly), this situation is handled by 15.5 MULTIPLE SKILL USE (option). The character can do up to three things at the same time, but must state priority. Skill Success Chance is reduced accordingly (depending on Difficulty of Skill and Priority). Those playing RQ or other games that emphasize weapons' modes of attack (or merely those who like realism) might want to limit Florentine to two weapons of the same mode (e.g. stab, slash, chop), so that you can use a sword & dagger, but not a sword & hand axe. Lee Gold
kaufman@uiucdcs.UUCP (kaufman ) (04/01/84)
#R:nmtvax:-18600:uiucdcs:9300026:000:149 uiucdcs!kaufman Mar 31 12:57:00 1984 But if the character's dexterity is sufficiently high (18, I believe), he/she can successfully attack with both weapons without the minus modifiers.
steven@qubix.UUCP (Steven Maurer) (04/08/84)
> Those playing RQ or other games that emphasize weapons' modes of attack > (or merely those who like realism) might want to limit Florentine to two > weapons of the same mode (e.g. stab, slash, chop), so that you can use > a sword & dagger, but not a sword & hand axe. Alas, you have it backwards. It is far easier to wield two weapons whose method of attack is far different, than it is to wield weapons that are the same. This is why using two lances, is patently rediculous, but using Rapier and Main Gauche (left-handed dagger), is well known. Actually, come to think of it, I realise now that it is simply stabbing weapons, that cannot be used well in florintine mode. However, florintine style is not as effective as most game systems (most notably Rune Quest) makes it out to be. (Two florintine attacks are not as good as single attacks, with two individuals). Steven Maurer
tomj@dartvax.UUCP (Thomas Johnston) (04/08/84)
The reasons for fighting florentine and for fighting with rapier and
dagger are rather different. Attacks made while fighting florentine are
made primarily with the edge of the weapon, perhaps trying to cut through
armour of some sort. The style of rapier and dagger came with the demise
of plate due to the long-bow, the cross-bow, gunpowder or the pike,
depending upon which author you read. When fighting with rapier and dagger,
while the point is faster than the edge, you cannot hope to penetrate much
in the way of armour. Furthermore, to use the dagger, you must face your
opponent, and present a larger target area!
Tom Johnston
{linus, cornell, decvax}!dartvax!tomjfaustus@ucbvax.UUCP (Wayne Christopher) (04/08/84)
Using two lances is ridiculous, but the reason is not because they are th same sort of weapon. Two knives, however, is perfectly reasonable. Wayne