I normally don't have high praises for pre-fabricated adventures or settings. However there are some products that are well made, and some nugget of inspiration can be found in almost anything. In this comment on JB's post in revamping Specularum, he alludes to the poor reviews that B6: The Veiled Society tends to receive. This module is not alone in receiving negative feedback. Many older modules are criticized for various reasons, lack of detail, no motivation for the villain, too cliche, etc, etc. Many of these criticisms are made in contrast to newer modules that promote "story" and "narrative" elements. I am not attempting to say that B6 or any other module is without flaws, yet many criticisms are laid at the feet of such works by those who don't seem to understand the core components of running a game or the inherent nature of a module. Running a module well will take more time and effort than creating your own content for the game; making someone else's content your own so that it fits your game will always be more difficult than creating your own material. Running a module poorly will also take more time and effort than pulling nonsense out of thin air during a session; the DM still has to take the time to read the module.
Back to the Module. As I mentioned, this module is by no means perfect. The building and npc cutouts are really unnecessary and rarely used, evidence of this is confirmed in my interview of my father about this module. It is space that could have been better used. The Radu narration reads like someone failed to become a writer and so snuck in their fiction in this module. The mystery is not fully explained in one single location or how the PCs can unravel the mystery. We can nitpick and point out flaws all day, so why do I think this is an example of a good module, especially for city adventures?
The primary virtue of this module is that it is short, yet also contains a lot of material for adventure. It is concise unlike many other adventures or rule books. We are told the vital information and nothing more. Concordant with this it is set up in such a way that the mystery and adventure unfolds in dramatically different ways every time it is played. It has replayability that unlike that available in a good dungeon. This module is a good example of what a module should be. It is easily placed in any campaign setting, yet still doesn't leave out details in order to be generic.
As far as the mystery goes; it is not difficult for the players to solve. There is no one point at which the players can be stumped and the DM has to take action for the 'plot' to continue. In fact, the PCs don't even have to follow the mystery. There has been only one group which I ran though this module that actually solved the mystery in the expected manner and followed the event structure laid out. There is so much variation of where the adventure could lead; there is no defined single outcome.
Lastly, what happens in this adventure will affect the state of affairs of the city afterwards. The players will be able to see how their actions directly influence the game world. They can ally with a single faction and become enemies with others, or they may stay aloof from all the factions and work for their own benefits. Whatever they choose the balance of power will shift.
And all of this is accomplished in 10 pages of adventure and 2 pages of background/DM advice.
30 April 2019
20 April 2019
Podcast: Dungeons and Dragons and Duncanites
Because it takes so long to transcribe one of the interviews with my father, I've decided to record everything now while I have the opportunity and work on the transcriptions later. In order to allow people to listen to these interviews in the meantime, I have created a podcast where I will be posting the audio files. It's called Dungeons and Dragons and Duncanites and is available on Google Podcasts, Radio Public, Breaker, Pocket Casts, and Spotify, Hopefully it will be up on iTunes soon. Duncanites is a longstanding inside joke with my family based on all the ites people in The Book of Mormon (Jaredites, Nephites, Lamanites, Zoramites, etc). So far I have posted interviews for B1, B2, B6, and the beginning of B10. I plan on going through all the modules we grew up on(X1, X4, X5, X6, X7, X9, XL1, O1, CM2, CM6, M1, M2, IM1, The Sword of Justice, The Treasure of the Hideous One, The Spindle), some of those we never used like War Rafts of Kron and Where Chaos Reigns, and others we only played as a lark with high level characters. I'll probably lump all of those into a single overview interview. After we've gotten through all the modules I want to go briefly go though the rulebooks, focusing on the adventures(mistamere and other suggested adventures), and houserules. From there I'm going to ask my dad to clarify things on some of his old maps. Finally we'll also talk about an overall timeline of the adventures we went through and how that changed the face of the known world. Oh, I also want to go over each of our old character sheets. I'm sure I'll think of more stuff to talk about before we're done.
17 April 2019
Academic Parochialism
Many people have a disdain for universities and "academia" in general. So when Alexis proposes a college level course on how to become a better DM, and then lays out in depth well researched course work, there are of course many adverse reactions. This is not helped the behavior of many academics which fuels this disdain in the first place. Here is a perfect example of how Academics should not behave. Too often well educated, intelligent people will be passive aggressive and behave like children on the playground who can't get along. Academia is supposed to be a place open to debate, there should be an encouragement to voice dissenting opinions. Well reasoned arguments should be a common occurrence among intelligent individuals. Instead there is tendency to reinforce the accepted dogma and not to challenge anything. This is why many people don't want D&D in school/college. They are afraid a dogma will form, and anyone who disagrees will be hushed into silence. Instead of being afraid of what Academia might do to our hobby we should be having intelligent discourse about the game so that the ideas developed by these arguments may be considered on par with Academic studies.
07 April 2019
Religion of the Cleric: 5th Level Spells
Continuing my discussion of how Clerical magic can help us understand his religious beliefs. This spell list is spread across the Expert and the Companion sets as will be the 6th level spell list.
The OD&D Cleric
Analysis of Level 1 Spells
Analysis of Level 2 Spells
Analysis of Level 3 Spells
Analysis of Level 4 Spells
Analysis of Level 6 Spells
Analysis of Level 7 Spells
Conclusions
From the Expert Rulebook:
Commune
This spell allows the cleric to ask questions of the greater powers (the DM, mythological deities, etc.). The cleric may ask three questions that can be answered yes or no. However, a cleric may commune only once a week. If this spell is used too often, the DM may wish to limit its use to once a month. Once a year the cleric may ask twice the normal number of questions.
I have always felt conflicted about this spell, being a religious person myself. Let's first lay out the doctrine of my church(The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) and my own experience with divine revelation. When praying for specific answer, whether it be about an important decision or a gospel related question, a person should study something first, come to a general conclusion and "then you must ask me[God] if it be right" (The Doctrine and Covenants Section 9 Verse 8) From there your decision is either confirmed when you feel the presence of the Holy Spirit(which is different for different people at different times, it's not always a 'burning of the bosom') or you receive a 'stupor of thought' as a negative answer. Now there has been much debate about what 'stupor of thought' means, but let me just summarize by saying that when you feel that Holy Spirit you know what course of action to take. Because of this scripture, and others that reinforce it, the Church teaches that we should ask God yes or no questions. What has been set forth above is the basic doctrine, my experience is somewhat more nuanced. Sometimes I have received answers that are more complicated than just an affirmation or negation, sometimes I receive an answer that basically says God doesn't care and to do what you want to do, and then there are times you receive answers to things you never asked, and all this is to say nothing of what is generally referred to as 'promptings' in the Church.
So, how does all this relate to the Commune spell? Well, firstly I think the yes or no requirement is a good start implying that the Deity worshiped by thus order of Clerics answers prayers in a manner similar to my own experiences, plus it is very gameable. As far as limiting to to only 3 questions, and only being able to cast this spell once a week, I understand these rules were written to limit player abuse, but it still doesn't feel quite right to me. Speaking of abuse, it is heavily implied, but not directly spoken to, that the yes or no answer should be correct/truthful. I have seen too many DMs claim that they don't have to answer the questions truthfully, they just don't want the players to know the truth, or they want to 'trick' them. It's all just an excuse for a bad DM to lie to his players. If you don't want them to be able to receive revelation from their gods, don't allow the spell in the game. So back to this limitation of 3 questions only once a week. I think this implies some very important things as to the nature of the Deity and the faith of the Cleric. I see 2 options for what this means, 1) either the Deity is distant and it requires a lot of time and effort to summon his attention, or there is some other limiting factor on the Deity's ability to communicate with his servants, or 2) the cleric must take the time to study and prepare the questions for an entire week using special poetical form or special words or he has to build up his faith to an extent to be able to communicate directly with his god. There are a myriad of explanations I can think of to explain these limitations, one example that strikes me is when Moses was in the habit of talking to God face to face there was a time when God said that he would only show him his backside. Things like that make me think these limitations are due more to the faith of the follower than the power or ability of the Deity.
One other thing I want to note is the fact that this a 5th level spell. That means [checking my charts] only a 10th level cleric can cast this. The level title for 9th level or above is 'Patriarch,' so basically the head of the church (ie the Pope) can use this and no one else (anyone else would go start their own church). This is not equivalent to personal divine revelation (all that stuff I was talking about at the beginning of this analysis); this is a prophetic calling. The cleric has a direct line to the will of god. So what happens when two clerics both can use this spell? They both become prophets with their own following and churches are built up around their legacy and their interpretation of the word of god, and remember it has to be an interpretation because they can only receive yes or no answers. Let's take a real world example: to confirm the doctrine of the Trinity, a modern christian might ask, "are the Holy Spirit, The Father, and The Son one God?" While in contrast someone from my church might ask, "Is the Godhead(the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) composed of three separate and distinct personages?" Both might receive an answer of 'yes' and interpret it to mean the other is wrong, but again this is all interpretation. For a Cleric with only this method of communicating with their Deity, it means there is no sacred text(the bible) that is the 'word of god.' The word of god only comes through as yes or no, so he could confirm whether something someone had written was correct or not, and then the cleric touts this piece of writing as the 'word of god,' but this never came directly as inspiration from god; there are no long winded, confusing prophecies direct from god. At least not in the form of a direct revelation, the next best thing would be an angel/messenger of god sent to declare his word.
What can we draw from all this? Well even if the religion of the standard cleric is monotheistic as surmised by other evidence, it is a very different monotheism from what has existed throughout history. There are no biblical style prophets proclaiming to be the mouthpiece of God. The leaders of branches of the church, or churches of the same basic belief system(think protestantism) act as interpreters and final arbiters of the will of god concerning very specific questions. These leaders fulfill a role similar to the modern day Pope; he interprets and decides the general practices and policies of the Catholic Church, but he doesn't claim to be a prophet like Moses. The only way for members of this religion to know the true 'Will of God' are through direct divine manifestations, whether that be a visitation from the Deity himself or a messenger (angel).
Create Food
This spell creates enough food to feed 12 men and their mounts for one day. For every level of the cleric above 8th, food for 12 additional men and mounts is created.
This is complementary to the 4th level spell Create Water. Again this allows a cleric to feed a small army. Mostly it brings to mind the tribes of Israel being fed by ‘Manna from Heaven’ for 40 years in the wilderness. This isn’t quite on such a large scale, but I could see a similar legend circulating among the modern followers of this religion.
Dispel Evil
This spell may affect all undead and enchanted (summoned, controlled, and animated) monsters within range. It will destroy the monster unless each victim makes a Saving Throw vs. Spells. If cast at only one creature, a -2 penalty applies to the Saving Throw. Any creature from another plane is Banished (forced to return to its home plane) if the Saving Throw is failed. Even if the Saving Throw is successful, the victims must flee the area, and will stay away as long as the caster concentrates (without moving).
This spell will also remove the curse from any one cursed item, or may be used to remove any magical charm.
This reiterates the idea that magical creatures are enemies or an affront to the Deity of the Cleric, implying that the Deity is connected to the natural or mundane world. Perhaps there is also the implication that the Deity has jurisdiction over the Prime Plane. In function this spell is a suped-up turn undead, also being able to turn or destroy enchanted creatures. Why a Cleric might use this spell to remove a curse instead of the Remove Curse Spell seems confusing, unless perhaps the cleric doesn't know whether the something or someone is cursed or enchanted.
Insect Plague
This spell summons a vast swarm of insects. The swarm obscures vision and drives off creatures of less than 3 Hit Dice (no Saving Throw). The swarm moves at up to 20’ per round as directed by the cleric while it is within range. The caster must concentrate, without moving, to control the swarm. If the caster is disturbed, the insects scatter and the spell ends. This spell only works outdoors and aboveground.
This is another connection to the natural world. The Deity of the Cleric has the power to control the lower forms of life. The implications of this are numerous; maybe this control is the result of an inherent mastery through creation, or maybe the Deity has a hive like mind that can supersede the natural queen/hive mind of these insects, or maybe the nature of the Deity is in common with all living things so that even the insects will listen to requests. There are many possible reasons that the Deity has some measure of control over even the lowest orders of the natural world, and each explanation tells us more about the inherent nature of the Deity.
Quest
This spell forces the recipient to perform some special task or quest, as commanded by the caster. The victim may make a Saving Throw vs. Spells to avoid the effect. A typical task might include slaying a certain monster, rescuing a prisoner, obtaining a magic item for the caster, or going on a pilgrimage. If the task is impossible or suicidal, the spell has no effect. Once the task is completed, the spell ends. Any victim refusing to go on the quest is cursed until the quest is continued. The type of curse is decided by the DM, but may be double normal strength.
The reverse of this spell, remove quest, may be used to dispel an unwanted quest or a quest-related curse. The chance of success is 50%, reduced by 5% for every level of the caster below that of the caster of the quest (an 11th level cleric attempting to remove a quest from a 13th level cleric has a 40% chance of success).
Unlike common Christian beliefs, this God can suspend the agency of an individual human. I see this as an extension of the command which the Deity has over all living things, there is nothing that separates man from beast. The saving throw does imply that intelligent beings with their own will may resist the commands of the Deity. Or are those commands weakened because they are channeled through a priest and don't come directly from the Deity? In either case the agency of man is not sacrosanct.
Raise Dead
By means of this spell, the cleric can raise any human, dwarf, halfling, or elf from the dead. The body must be present, and if part is missing, the raised character may be disabled in some way. An 8th level cleric can raise a body that has been dead for up to four days. For each level of the cleric above 8th, four days are added to this time. Thus, a 10th level cleric can raise bodies that have been dead for up to twelve days. The recipient becomes alive with 1 hit point, and cannot fight, cast spells, use abilities, carry heavy loads, or move more than half speed. These penalties will disappear after 2 full weeks of complete bed rest, but the healing cannot be speeded by magic.
This spell may also be cast at any one undead creature within range. The creature will be slain unless it makes a Saving Throw vs. Spells with a -2 penalty. However, a vampire thus affected is only forced to retreat to its coffin, in gaseous form, to rest.
The OD&D Cleric
Analysis of Level 1 Spells
Analysis of Level 2 Spells
Analysis of Level 3 Spells
Analysis of Level 4 Spells
Analysis of Level 6 Spells
Analysis of Level 7 Spells
Conclusions
From the Expert Rulebook:
Commune
This spell allows the cleric to ask questions of the greater powers (the DM, mythological deities, etc.). The cleric may ask three questions that can be answered yes or no. However, a cleric may commune only once a week. If this spell is used too often, the DM may wish to limit its use to once a month. Once a year the cleric may ask twice the normal number of questions.
I have always felt conflicted about this spell, being a religious person myself. Let's first lay out the doctrine of my church(The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) and my own experience with divine revelation. When praying for specific answer, whether it be about an important decision or a gospel related question, a person should study something first, come to a general conclusion and "then you must ask me[God] if it be right" (The Doctrine and Covenants Section 9 Verse 8) From there your decision is either confirmed when you feel the presence of the Holy Spirit(which is different for different people at different times, it's not always a 'burning of the bosom') or you receive a 'stupor of thought' as a negative answer. Now there has been much debate about what 'stupor of thought' means, but let me just summarize by saying that when you feel that Holy Spirit you know what course of action to take. Because of this scripture, and others that reinforce it, the Church teaches that we should ask God yes or no questions. What has been set forth above is the basic doctrine, my experience is somewhat more nuanced. Sometimes I have received answers that are more complicated than just an affirmation or negation, sometimes I receive an answer that basically says God doesn't care and to do what you want to do, and then there are times you receive answers to things you never asked, and all this is to say nothing of what is generally referred to as 'promptings' in the Church.
So, how does all this relate to the Commune spell? Well, firstly I think the yes or no requirement is a good start implying that the Deity worshiped by thus order of Clerics answers prayers in a manner similar to my own experiences, plus it is very gameable. As far as limiting to to only 3 questions, and only being able to cast this spell once a week, I understand these rules were written to limit player abuse, but it still doesn't feel quite right to me. Speaking of abuse, it is heavily implied, but not directly spoken to, that the yes or no answer should be correct/truthful. I have seen too many DMs claim that they don't have to answer the questions truthfully, they just don't want the players to know the truth, or they want to 'trick' them. It's all just an excuse for a bad DM to lie to his players. If you don't want them to be able to receive revelation from their gods, don't allow the spell in the game. So back to this limitation of 3 questions only once a week. I think this implies some very important things as to the nature of the Deity and the faith of the Cleric. I see 2 options for what this means, 1) either the Deity is distant and it requires a lot of time and effort to summon his attention, or there is some other limiting factor on the Deity's ability to communicate with his servants, or 2) the cleric must take the time to study and prepare the questions for an entire week using special poetical form or special words or he has to build up his faith to an extent to be able to communicate directly with his god. There are a myriad of explanations I can think of to explain these limitations, one example that strikes me is when Moses was in the habit of talking to God face to face there was a time when God said that he would only show him his backside. Things like that make me think these limitations are due more to the faith of the follower than the power or ability of the Deity.
One other thing I want to note is the fact that this a 5th level spell. That means [checking my charts] only a 10th level cleric can cast this. The level title for 9th level or above is 'Patriarch,' so basically the head of the church (ie the Pope) can use this and no one else (anyone else would go start their own church). This is not equivalent to personal divine revelation (all that stuff I was talking about at the beginning of this analysis); this is a prophetic calling. The cleric has a direct line to the will of god. So what happens when two clerics both can use this spell? They both become prophets with their own following and churches are built up around their legacy and their interpretation of the word of god, and remember it has to be an interpretation because they can only receive yes or no answers. Let's take a real world example: to confirm the doctrine of the Trinity, a modern christian might ask, "are the Holy Spirit, The Father, and The Son one God?" While in contrast someone from my church might ask, "Is the Godhead(the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) composed of three separate and distinct personages?" Both might receive an answer of 'yes' and interpret it to mean the other is wrong, but again this is all interpretation. For a Cleric with only this method of communicating with their Deity, it means there is no sacred text(the bible) that is the 'word of god.' The word of god only comes through as yes or no, so he could confirm whether something someone had written was correct or not, and then the cleric touts this piece of writing as the 'word of god,' but this never came directly as inspiration from god; there are no long winded, confusing prophecies direct from god. At least not in the form of a direct revelation, the next best thing would be an angel/messenger of god sent to declare his word.
What can we draw from all this? Well even if the religion of the standard cleric is monotheistic as surmised by other evidence, it is a very different monotheism from what has existed throughout history. There are no biblical style prophets proclaiming to be the mouthpiece of God. The leaders of branches of the church, or churches of the same basic belief system(think protestantism) act as interpreters and final arbiters of the will of god concerning very specific questions. These leaders fulfill a role similar to the modern day Pope; he interprets and decides the general practices and policies of the Catholic Church, but he doesn't claim to be a prophet like Moses. The only way for members of this religion to know the true 'Will of God' are through direct divine manifestations, whether that be a visitation from the Deity himself or a messenger (angel).
Create Food
This spell creates enough food to feed 12 men and their mounts for one day. For every level of the cleric above 8th, food for 12 additional men and mounts is created.
This is complementary to the 4th level spell Create Water. Again this allows a cleric to feed a small army. Mostly it brings to mind the tribes of Israel being fed by ‘Manna from Heaven’ for 40 years in the wilderness. This isn’t quite on such a large scale, but I could see a similar legend circulating among the modern followers of this religion.
Dispel Evil
This spell may affect all undead and enchanted (summoned, controlled, and animated) monsters within range. It will destroy the monster unless each victim makes a Saving Throw vs. Spells. If cast at only one creature, a -2 penalty applies to the Saving Throw. Any creature from another plane is Banished (forced to return to its home plane) if the Saving Throw is failed. Even if the Saving Throw is successful, the victims must flee the area, and will stay away as long as the caster concentrates (without moving).
This spell will also remove the curse from any one cursed item, or may be used to remove any magical charm.
This reiterates the idea that magical creatures are enemies or an affront to the Deity of the Cleric, implying that the Deity is connected to the natural or mundane world. Perhaps there is also the implication that the Deity has jurisdiction over the Prime Plane. In function this spell is a suped-up turn undead, also being able to turn or destroy enchanted creatures. Why a Cleric might use this spell to remove a curse instead of the Remove Curse Spell seems confusing, unless perhaps the cleric doesn't know whether the something or someone is cursed or enchanted.
Insect Plague
This spell summons a vast swarm of insects. The swarm obscures vision and drives off creatures of less than 3 Hit Dice (no Saving Throw). The swarm moves at up to 20’ per round as directed by the cleric while it is within range. The caster must concentrate, without moving, to control the swarm. If the caster is disturbed, the insects scatter and the spell ends. This spell only works outdoors and aboveground.
This is another connection to the natural world. The Deity of the Cleric has the power to control the lower forms of life. The implications of this are numerous; maybe this control is the result of an inherent mastery through creation, or maybe the Deity has a hive like mind that can supersede the natural queen/hive mind of these insects, or maybe the nature of the Deity is in common with all living things so that even the insects will listen to requests. There are many possible reasons that the Deity has some measure of control over even the lowest orders of the natural world, and each explanation tells us more about the inherent nature of the Deity.
Quest
This spell forces the recipient to perform some special task or quest, as commanded by the caster. The victim may make a Saving Throw vs. Spells to avoid the effect. A typical task might include slaying a certain monster, rescuing a prisoner, obtaining a magic item for the caster, or going on a pilgrimage. If the task is impossible or suicidal, the spell has no effect. Once the task is completed, the spell ends. Any victim refusing to go on the quest is cursed until the quest is continued. The type of curse is decided by the DM, but may be double normal strength.
The reverse of this spell, remove quest, may be used to dispel an unwanted quest or a quest-related curse. The chance of success is 50%, reduced by 5% for every level of the caster below that of the caster of the quest (an 11th level cleric attempting to remove a quest from a 13th level cleric has a 40% chance of success).
Unlike common Christian beliefs, this God can suspend the agency of an individual human. I see this as an extension of the command which the Deity has over all living things, there is nothing that separates man from beast. The saving throw does imply that intelligent beings with their own will may resist the commands of the Deity. Or are those commands weakened because they are channeled through a priest and don't come directly from the Deity? In either case the agency of man is not sacrosanct.
Raise Dead
By means of this spell, the cleric can raise any human, dwarf, halfling, or elf from the dead. The body must be present, and if part is missing, the raised character may be disabled in some way. An 8th level cleric can raise a body that has been dead for up to four days. For each level of the cleric above 8th, four days are added to this time. Thus, a 10th level cleric can raise bodies that have been dead for up to twelve days. The recipient becomes alive with 1 hit point, and cannot fight, cast spells, use abilities, carry heavy loads, or move more than half speed. These penalties will disappear after 2 full weeks of complete bed rest, but the healing cannot be speeded by magic.
The general implications of this spell are enormous. The Deity has complete power over life and death. Interestingly this spell also has some connection to real world Judeo-Christian tradition. As I understand it, the jews believed that the spirit left the body on the 4th day, which matches with the time limit on this spell.
This spell may also be cast at any one undead creature within range. The creature will be slain unless it makes a Saving Throw vs. Spells with a -2 penalty. However, a vampire thus affected is only forced to retreat to its coffin, in gaseous form, to rest.
This effect upon the undead shows that undeath is the antithesis of life. The Undead have no spirits that can be returned to their bodies and are hence not returned to normal life when this spell is cast, they simply return to inanimate matter. If death is the absence of life, then undeath is the opposite of life.
The reverse of this spell, finger of death, creates a death ray that will kill any one living creature within 60’. The victim may make a Saving Throw vs. Death Ray to avoid the effect. A Lawful cleric will only use finger of death in a life-or-death situation.
The reverse effects of this spell simply shows the depravity of Evil Priests; they will kill with impunity. Instead of giving life, the enemies of the church take life, and can be punished in like manner by their counterparts in the church.
From the Players Companion:
Cure Critical Wounds
This spell is similar to a cure light wounds spell, but will cure one living creature of 6-21 (3d6+3) points of damage.
The reverse of this spell (cause critical wounds) causes 6-21points of damage to any living creature or character touched (no Saving Throw). The caster must make a normal HIt rol to cause the critical wound.
As with other sure wound spells, this shows the healing nature of the Church. The message of the church is to bring healing and comfort, and the enemies of the church seek to cause pain and suffering.
Raise Dead
When cast at an Undead creature with more Hit Dice than a vampire, this spell inflicts 3-30 (3d10) points of damage. The victim may make a Saving Throw vs. Spells to take 1/2 damage.
The revesre, finger of death, will actually cure 3-30 points of damage for any undead with 10 or more Hit Dice (phantom, haunt, spirit, nightshade, or special).
These details add little to what has already been said; it just provides more specific rules for specific situations.
Truesight
When this spell is cast, the cleric is able to clearly see all things within 120'. The spell is quite powerful; the cleric can see all hidden, invisible, and ethereal objects and creatures, as with the magic-user detect invisible spell (including secret doors). In addition any things or creatures not in their true form- whether polymorphed, disguised, or otherwise- are seen as they truly are, with no possibility of deception. Alignment is also "seen," as is experience and power (level or Hit Dice).
The reverse effects of this spell simply shows the depravity of Evil Priests; they will kill with impunity. Instead of giving life, the enemies of the church take life, and can be punished in like manner by their counterparts in the church.
From the Players Companion:
Cure Critical Wounds
This spell is similar to a cure light wounds spell, but will cure one living creature of 6-21 (3d6+3) points of damage.
The reverse of this spell (cause critical wounds) causes 6-21points of damage to any living creature or character touched (no Saving Throw). The caster must make a normal HIt rol to cause the critical wound.
As with other sure wound spells, this shows the healing nature of the Church. The message of the church is to bring healing and comfort, and the enemies of the church seek to cause pain and suffering.
Raise Dead
When cast at an Undead creature with more Hit Dice than a vampire, this spell inflicts 3-30 (3d10) points of damage. The victim may make a Saving Throw vs. Spells to take 1/2 damage.
The revesre, finger of death, will actually cure 3-30 points of damage for any undead with 10 or more Hit Dice (phantom, haunt, spirit, nightshade, or special).
These details add little to what has already been said; it just provides more specific rules for specific situations.
Truesight
When this spell is cast, the cleric is able to clearly see all things within 120'. The spell is quite powerful; the cleric can see all hidden, invisible, and ethereal objects and creatures, as with the magic-user detect invisible spell (including secret doors). In addition any things or creatures not in their true form- whether polymorphed, disguised, or otherwise- are seen as they truly are, with no possibility of deception. Alignment is also "seen," as is experience and power (level or Hit Dice).
This speaks to the Omniscience of the Deity worshiped by the Cleric. The Diety knows the true nature of all things. There is more and more evidence that this Deity can see everywhere at once and knows all thins, and may impart to his servants on earth select portions of his knowledge.
03 April 2019
The Academic study of RPGs
Alexis has just finished writing his 201 series in the style of an academic university class. This was very well done and thoroughly researched. I didn't treat it with the same seriousness or dedication I would were I take this at an actual college, but I learned quite a lot just from reading it.
In this post he outlines a series of courses on DMing and RPGs that would expand on and really fill the traditional academic structure of a university degree. While I think a university level course about RPGs or DMing would be great, I don't know about an actual degree program at a University; maybe a MOOC would be a better method of delivery. One upside of MOOCs is that Alexis, or anybody really, doesn't have to wait for someone else to adapt his work.
In regards to Academic rigour, I'd like to discuss something that Alexis wrote pertaining to DMing and these college courses.
"This dictates that there must be a right and a wrong; a correct way, based upon a tried and true curriculum, based on accepted theories and established methods."
I agree with this statement wholeheartedly. This doesn't mean that there is one answer that always applies to how to DM, or world build, etc. It means there are common accepted good practices. Moreover, there may be multiple answers to a single question that are equally valid. What that answer is will be dictated by circumstances as much as standard methods. Example: In one GIS cartography course we spent weeks talking about color schemes and typology. When to use a diverging, sequential, or qualitative color scheme depends on the type source data used and what you are trying to emphasize on the map. On a map of population you may use sequential colors because a qualitative color scheme would be inappropriate and confusing to the reader, but which colors used and what exact values they represent are up to your discretion as long as you account for color blindness and ability to distinguish the different gradations of color. My point being, that when Alexis, or I, or other people say that there is a right way to do things, we aren't talking about specific choices you must make (such as using the real earth as the basis for your setting), rather we are speaking of the ordering and following of general methods, how and why you make decisions.Academia, through study and trial and error, usually develops common methods and comes to a general consensus on subjects of their field.
I had written most of the above and decided not to post, but then Alexis followed up with this workshop.
The responses he got, while interesting and not inherently bad, still bother me. The general character of the responses he received really irks me. The descriptions tend to to be oh so familiar, like they come right out of an osr module's boxed text. They don't characterize how this room would actually be presented to the players. Is this actually how you would describe a room to players?or is it the descriptions from which you would run the room? Actual dialog tends to be short and choppy. Generally at the table the DM doesn't have time to think of all these creative adjectives. The only time I have witnessed a table of players let a DM describe something in more than one or two sentences without interruption/questions/taking action is when the DM is clearly reading boxed text and the players are letting him out of respect. Granted I understand the workshop is limited to the format of the blog, it's just the given descriptions feel so rehearsed. Again I think the content of the descriptions is just fine and Alexis does a good job at pointing out the possibilities and conundrums presented by them, I just feel the way they are presented is flawed.
What I have seen of this workshop reinforces my initial idea that a MOOC would be a great way for Alexis to deliver these academic courses and begin to develop the idea that the role of a DM can be taught and a subject for study.
In this post he outlines a series of courses on DMing and RPGs that would expand on and really fill the traditional academic structure of a university degree. While I think a university level course about RPGs or DMing would be great, I don't know about an actual degree program at a University; maybe a MOOC would be a better method of delivery. One upside of MOOCs is that Alexis, or anybody really, doesn't have to wait for someone else to adapt his work.
In regards to Academic rigour, I'd like to discuss something that Alexis wrote pertaining to DMing and these college courses.
"This dictates that there must be a right and a wrong; a correct way, based upon a tried and true curriculum, based on accepted theories and established methods."
I agree with this statement wholeheartedly. This doesn't mean that there is one answer that always applies to how to DM, or world build, etc. It means there are common accepted good practices. Moreover, there may be multiple answers to a single question that are equally valid. What that answer is will be dictated by circumstances as much as standard methods. Example: In one GIS cartography course we spent weeks talking about color schemes and typology. When to use a diverging, sequential, or qualitative color scheme depends on the type source data used and what you are trying to emphasize on the map. On a map of population you may use sequential colors because a qualitative color scheme would be inappropriate and confusing to the reader, but which colors used and what exact values they represent are up to your discretion as long as you account for color blindness and ability to distinguish the different gradations of color. My point being, that when Alexis, or I, or other people say that there is a right way to do things, we aren't talking about specific choices you must make (such as using the real earth as the basis for your setting), rather we are speaking of the ordering and following of general methods, how and why you make decisions.Academia, through study and trial and error, usually develops common methods and comes to a general consensus on subjects of their field.
I had written most of the above and decided not to post, but then Alexis followed up with this workshop.
The responses he got, while interesting and not inherently bad, still bother me. The general character of the responses he received really irks me. The descriptions tend to to be oh so familiar, like they come right out of an osr module's boxed text. They don't characterize how this room would actually be presented to the players. Is this actually how you would describe a room to players?or is it the descriptions from which you would run the room? Actual dialog tends to be short and choppy. Generally at the table the DM doesn't have time to think of all these creative adjectives. The only time I have witnessed a table of players let a DM describe something in more than one or two sentences without interruption/questions/taking action is when the DM is clearly reading boxed text and the players are letting him out of respect. Granted I understand the workshop is limited to the format of the blog, it's just the given descriptions feel so rehearsed. Again I think the content of the descriptions is just fine and Alexis does a good job at pointing out the possibilities and conundrums presented by them, I just feel the way they are presented is flawed.
What I have seen of this workshop reinforces my initial idea that a MOOC would be a great way for Alexis to deliver these academic courses and begin to develop the idea that the role of a DM can be taught and a subject for study.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)