OOC / Questions?

[dmw71]

I'm perfectly fine with what you said, Argennian - that a fighter gains additional proficiencies at lvl 3, 5, 7, 9, etc.

Agreed.

Ummm... so Double Specialization. Is that something you allow at chargen, Argennian? Or is that something which has to be taken later? Do you have a minimum level limit on being double specialized? That's definitely something my fighter will shoot for, if it is an option.

Per the 'Rules & Requests' post:
"Double Specialization: A single specialized fighter can only become double specialized if trained by a higher level fighter that is currently double specialized themselves. (Note: double specialization cannot be accomplished by self-training for characters under 12th level.)"

There's also this from earlier in this 'OOC / Questions?' thread:
"Double Specialization: A fighter can only be become double specialized if they're trained by a higher-level fighter or weaponmaster (an npc class) that is currently double specialized in the same weapon. There will be conditional modifiers on training time and such, as tbd. So this could happen as early as 3rd level, trainer available and willing!"



I don't know how double specialization works or how much it costs, but if that is something you're considering, you might want to make sure you bank a proficiency slot (or two) as necessary, so if you do find a weaponmaster at third level, you'll have the necessary slots available to double-specialize at that time.

[Alethan]

I don't know how double specialization works or how much it costs, but if that is something you're considering, you might want to make sure you bank a proficiency slot (or two) as necessary, so if you do find a weaponmaster at third level, you'll have the necessary slots available to double-specialize at that time.

I don't think that would be necessary, as long as I get another proficiency slot at level 3. Per OSRIC...

Double Specialisation (optional): For melee weapons that
are not polearms or two-handed swords, a third weapon profi -
ciency may be used to specialise further; this increases combat
bonuses to +3 to hit and +3 damage with the weapon.

It just takes one more proficiency slot to Double Specialize in a weapon in which you are already specialized. I'm not sure why they're excluding polearms and two-handed swords from Double Specialization, though. Do they mean to say "It costs two more proficiency slots for polearms and two-handed swords."? Or are they completely excluding the weapon types from double-specialization entirely? I would assume the latter, but they could have just as easily meant the former and did not include another sentence explaining it.

Too bad there isn't some way to pose all of these questions to the writers of the OSRIC rule book! That would be helpful.

But, in his Afterword, Stuart Marshall (final author and editor of OSRIC) does give the following advice...

At this point, it’s traditional to remind players
that the GM can change or ignore any rule whatsoever, as he or
she sees fit or on a whim, with or without giving a reason—please
consider yourself reminded. And the traditional advice to GMs is
the same here too: Never follow a rule over a cliff.

Always good to be reminded of this.

I have absolutely no problems at all with playing any game with rules customized by the GM. Heck, they could have two different campaigns going with different rules in each one and that wouldn't bother me. The only thing I request is that a GM explicitly state their "home brew" rules upfront and don't spring them on the group AFTER one of them kicks into effect, especially if the PCs would have done something differently had that rule been known.

[dmw71]

1st level mages also start knowing 4 spells: 1 must be Read Magic and 1 is chosen. The last 2 are randomly rolled for.*

* Note: The Illusionist/Mage's INT score will dictate both the % chance of knowing a spell and the minimum and maximum number of spells they can know, per level. Other than Read Magic for the M-U, whenever a spell is either picked or rolled for, a percentile must be rolled to see if they can know/learn that spell. Spells failed to know/learn on a particular level can be rerolled for again at the next level.

Regardless of INT score, a 1st level illusionist and mage only starts with 4 spells. During the course of adventuring, a 1st level mage with a 16 INT can learn between 7 and 11 spells at 1st level. This means if you find a scroll or spell book, you will automatically get a chance to roll a percentile to know the spell for at least 3 more than the 4 already known and up to 7 more at the most (4+7=11).

Okay, since I almost never play a magic user, let me make sure I correctly understand starting spell acquisition.

A magic user will automatically know the 'Read Magic' spell (and that will count against one of their initial four spells)
Additionally, they get to select any one other spell of her choosing and also get to roll for two other first level spells randomly.

These three other starting spells, are they automatically understood, or do they each need to be rolled against the 'Chance to Understand Spells' percentage per the characters' intelligence? I just want to make sure the initial spells are automatically understood, and only newly discovered or learned spells need to be checked for.


Thanks in advance!

- Dave

[Alethan]

1st level mages also start knowing 4 spells: 1 must be Read Magic and 1 is chosen. The last 2 are randomly rolled for.*

* Note: The Illusionist/Mage's INT score will dictate both the % chance of knowing a spell and the minimum and maximum number of spells they can know, per level. Other than Read Magic for the M-U, whenever a spell is either picked or rolled for, a percentile must be rolled to see if they can know/learn that spell. Spells failed to know/learn on a particular level can be rerolled for again at the next level.

Regardless of INT score, a 1st level illusionist and mage only starts with 4 spells. During the course of adventuring, a 1st level mage with a 16 INT can learn between 7 and 11 spells at 1st level. This means if you find a scroll or spell book, you will automatically get a chance to roll a percentile to know the spell for at least 3 more than the 4 already known and up to 7 more at the most (4+7=11).

Okay, since I almost never play a magic user, let me make sure I correctly understand starting spell acquisition.

A magic user will automatically know the 'Read Magic' spell (and that will count against one of their initial four spells)
Additionally, they get to select any one other spell of her choosing and also get to roll for two other first level spells randomly.

These three other starting spells, are they automatically understood, or do they each need to be rolled against the 'Chance to Understand Spells' percentage per the characters' intelligence? I just want to make sure the initial spells are automatically understood, and only newly discovered or learned spells need to be checked for.


Thanks in advance!

- Dave

The way we rolled it up in Ron's Mushroom game was the check had to be applied to every selected spell (random or otherwise) except Read Magic. The logic being if you don't know Read Magic, then you never would have graduated from Magic Users University. My advice would be to roll your random spells first (roll random die for spell, roll % die to see if you understand it, repeat until you have two spells). That way, you'll know what you have and what you might want to try for with your selected spell.

[dmw71]

The way we rolled it up in Ron's Mushroom game was the check had to be applied to every selected spell (random or otherwise) except Read Magic. The logic being if you don't know Read Magic, then you never would have graduated from Magic Users University.

Argennian can obviously correct us if we're wrong, but that was pretty much what I was assuming as well.

My advice would be to roll your random spells first (roll random die for spell, roll % die to see if you understand it, repeat until you have two spells). That way, you'll know what you have and what you might want to try for with your selected spell.

That was my plan.

[Thalion]

Question regarding Encumbrance:

What does the surprise adjustment represent on the encumbrance/weight carried table found on page 117?

Say my character was unencumbered and and in armor lighter than chainmail. The surprise adjustment is +1.

Is that an adjustment to surprising others or an additional reaction adjustment when being surprised?

[Xaxyx]

Too bad there isn't some way to pose all of these questions to the writers of the OSRIC rule book! That would be helpful.

Actually, I managed to track down PapersAndPaychecks, the editor for OSRIC, who asserts that this particular rule was purposely left undefined. Thus, each DM must decide this for him or herself.

[Argennian]

Dang. That sounds logical, as well. I'm sure the OSRIC writer didn't think there would be any confusion when they wrote it, but adding just a few words to the proficiency description, or providing an example, or... maybe in the class section that indicates proficiencies, saying, "Weapon Proficiencies: 4 + 1 every 2 levels thereafter", would have been a good idea.

I'm perfectly fine with what you said, Argennian - that a fighter gains additional proficiencies at lvl 3, 5, 7, 9, etc.

Yeah, the 1E PhB makes it clear by giving you the example in their Weapon Proficiencies section (pg37) and with descriptor references as Xyxax pointed out in the Magic Missile spell description. It would appear that OSRIC also has some ambiguity issues, therefore making it officially like 1E in nature! You can read through the entire book once and find at least a half dozen instances where some additional verbage or descriptors would make things so much clearer. But overall, I'm really very, very impressed with OSRIC and absolutely think it has waay more positives and redeeming factors going for it than ambiguous text. Papers & paychecks (aka Stuart Marshall) deserves huge accolades for his accomplishment here, in addition to Matt and the crew. I'd highly recommend anyone that can go to Black Blade Publishing's site and buy their OSRIC hardcover. Tacojohn (Jon) and Grodog (Allan) of BBP are Top Drawer gentlemen and the proceeds go to growing the OSRIC experience. (Extra XP awarded to any player that does so!! )

Just as in AD&D, DMs and players will need to make house rules or come to a concensus on how something should be adjudicated moving forward. I look forward to getting input from everyone here about stuff like this we come across. Again, the PbP game shines in that it allows time for analyzation, discussion and resolution without really affecting the pace of the game. We'll try to avoid retro maneuvers whenever we can, but you have my promise as DM that I'll do so in a second when needed.

So, since the bow costs two proficiency slots for specialization, that means it requires three slots total. Our halfling fighter could take bow, short sword, and dagger (just examples) and bank one proficiency slot at chargen. Then he'd gain a 5th proficiency slot at level 3 and be able to use that, plus his banked proficiency slot from chargen, to gain bow specialization.

Yes, this is exactly how it works.

Ummm... so Double Specialization. Is that something you allow at chargen, Argennian? Or is that something which has to be taken later? Do you have a minimum level limit on being double specialized? That's definitely something my fighter will shoot for, if it is an option.

Heh, no Double Specialization at 1st level. (But I'm glad someone asked! )

The earliest Double-Spec can be achived would be 3rd level for single-class fighters (that started specialized), 5th level for multi-class fighters, human rangers and paladins (if specialization is taken at 3rd), and 7th level for demi-human rangers (that specialized at 5th).

[Argennian]

The way we rolled it up in Ron's Mushroom game was the check had to be applied to every selected spell (random or otherwise) except Read Magic. The logic being if you don't know Read Magic, then you never would have graduated from Magic Users University.

Argennian can obviously correct us if we're wrong, but that was pretty much what I was assuming as well.

This is exactly how we'll handle it. Whether or not you pick or roll randomly, you need to roll equal to or less than your "% Chance to Know" in order to know and take the spell. If you fail, just either pick or randomly reroll for the next attempt.

My advice would be to roll your random spells first (roll random die for spell, roll % die to see if you understand it, repeat until you have two spells). That way, you'll know what you have and what you might want to try for with your selected spell.

That was my plan.

Huzzah!


(Note: please remember to link all of your rolls at the bottom of your character's sheet! )

[Argennian]

Question regarding Encumbrance:

What does the surprise adjustment represent on the encumbrance/weight carried table found on page 117?

It represents the bonus & penalty to a PC's surprise roll based on their total current encumbrance. Movement is modified in segments of 30'/round each. The four levels of encumbrance/(movement) (along with modifiers) are listed by the following categories:

1. unencumbered (120')
2. encumbered (90')
3. moderately encumbered (60')
4. severely encumbered (30')

As stated on pg117, the table uses an example of a character with 120ft movement when unencumbered. Using the OSRIC table would net the above movement rates by encumbrance level. If your PC starts with a movement rate of 90', you would be:
1. 90'
2. 90' - 60'
3. 60' - 30'
4. 30' (-0'*)

(*no less than 30' unless character is over-encumbered, i.e. - carrying more than 150lbs. as adjusted with their respective STR score.)


Note: Don't forget that if you are unencumbered, you get a +1 to yours or your party's surprise roll. A high Dex score can only be applied if the character is not moderately or severely encumbered (i.e. at 1 or 2, not 3 or 4). Any low Dex penalty will always apply to each level of encumbrance/movement.

Say my character was unencumbered and and in armor lighter than chainmail. The surprise adjustment is +1.

Correct.

Is that an adjustment to surprising others or an additional reaction adjustment when being surprised?

I would say both, in most instances.

[Argennian]

Too bad there isn't some way to pose all of these questions to the writers of the OSRIC rule book! That would be helpful.

Actually, I managed to track down PapersAndPaychecks, the editor for OSRIC, who asserts that this particular rule was purposely left undefined. Thus, each DM must decide this for him or herself.

Great thread, Xaxyx, especially in getting a response from "The Man" himself!

I've always seen OSRIC and 1E as going hand in hand, and after reading P&P's post, it makes sense that a retained ambiguity serves a dual purpose. Being able to have each game and game group do what they like with the rules just inspires awesome!


One of the things that is very important to me here, and I want to continue to reinterate this, is that I am encouraging you all to be as proactive a part of this campaign (as you see fit) Above Game, too. Your ideas, opinions, questions and submissions will really allow us a forum and opportunity to get a broader understanding and realize that varied interpretations provide great ideas and resources for everyone. Allowing for a cooperative/team effort can raise the fun to new heights, imho.


Cheers,

Mitch

[Alethan]

Character background has been written and added. I think I'm pretty much done with my character sheet at this point.

Feel free to review and let me know of any changes I might need to make, Argennian.

Thanks,

Al

[Thalion]

Character background has been written and added. I think I'm pretty much done with my character sheet at this point.

Feel free to review and let me know of any changes I might need to make, Argennian.

Thanks,

Al

VERY nice background! I'm impressed!

Looks like we're going on a boat. Probably not a good idea for me to buy a horse then.

[Alethan]

VERY nice background! I'm impressed!

Looks like we're going on a boat. Probably not a good idea for me to buy a horse then.

Thanks! If you tell me to sit down and just start writing about someone/something, I generally struggle with the task. But if you give me three simple facts and tell me to weave them into a story, that helps drastically and I can come up with something with some good meat to it in short order.

Speaking of meat... we can always eat the horse before we get on the boat.

[Argennian]

Character background has been written and added. I think I'm pretty much done with my character sheet at this point.

Feel free to review and let me know of any changes I might need to make, Argennian.

Thanks,

Al

Everything looks great, Al. Well done!

VERY nice background! I'm impressed!

Looks like we're going on a boat. Probably not a good idea for me to buy a horse then.

Yeah, looks like you're headed for a sea voyage of sorts (at least at this point... ). Your PC would be 100% aware of this and could sell his mount in plenty of time, so yeah, keep the money or use it for something else.


(From the Strategy Thread:)

Whereas, (Argennian) may be waiting for you to finalize your class before giving you your background. Again, I would suggest speaking with him directly.

Funny. He and I did exchange messages earlier today (I asked him a question about arrows... with the whole archer character in mind) and he mentioned that he would get me my background information later today or tomorrow. I'm pretty sure this background information is the result of the extra rolls we made (e.g. family history, starting disposition, etc...) and not necessarily class-dependent, but maybe I'm wrong?

Well, it does kind of make a difference. There will be 3 details/aspects of your PC background as relates to your Family History and Starting Disposition rolls and how you may (or may not) be tied to the Hands of Balance. It's not impossible for me to give you this first and have you change up after, but I'd prefer your PC's class be sorted first, if possible!

[dmw71]

Well, it does kind of make a difference. There will be 3 details/aspects of your PC background as relates to your Family History and Starting Disposition rolls and how you may (or may not) be tied to the Hands of Balance. It's not impossible for me to give you this first and have you change up after, but I'd prefer your PC's class be sorted first, if possible!

Let's keep it simple. I will drop the magic user and make Caelvanna a straight fighter.

[Thalion]

Does anyone know where the rules are for how much a container can fit?

eg... how much does a backpack hold vs. a satchel vs. a large belt pouch?

I'm trying to avoid having to carry a backpack... encumbrance 10 (empty). OUCH!

[Argennian]

Does anyone know where the rules are for how much a container can fit?

eg... how much does a backpack hold vs. a satchel vs. a large belt pouch?

I'm trying to avoid having to carry a backpack... encumbrance 10 (empty). OUCH!

There's this table in OSRIC,pg118 (right after the encumbrance/movement section):

Naturally, characters must have a container if they wish to carry
liquids, large numbers of coins, etc. Capacities of sample containers
are as follows:
container / capacity
Small Pouch or Purse: 1/4 cu. ft. or 2.5 lbs
Large Pouch: 1/2 cu. ft. or 5 lbs
Small Sack: 1 cu. ft. or 10 lbs
Backpack: 3 cu. ft. or 30 lbs
Large Sack: 4 cu. ft. or 40 lbs
Waterskin: 3 pints

If there's something you're thinking about that's not on the list, we'll check some other references and get sorted!

[dmw71]

Does anyone know where the rules are for how much a container can fit?

eg... how much does a backpack hold vs. a satchel vs. a large belt pouch?

I'm trying to avoid having to carry a backpack... encumbrance 10 (empty). OUCH!

That's a great question.

There's this table in OSRIC,pg118 (right after the encumbrance/movement section):

Naturally, characters must have a container if they wish to carry
liquids, large numbers of coins, etc. Capacities of sample containers
are as follows:
container / capacity
Small Pouch or Purse: 1/4 cu. ft. or 2.5 lbs
Large Pouch: 1/2 cu. ft. or 5 lbs
Small Sack: 1 cu. ft. or 10 lbs
Backpack: 3 cu. ft. or 30 lbs
Large Sack: 4 cu. ft. or 40 lbs
Waterskin: 3 pints

If there's something you're thinking about that's not on the list, we'll check some other references and get sorted!

Thank you for identifying the answer. This is actually quite helpful.

[tkrexx]

I'm a Mailman IRL, we are allowed to carry 35lbs. in our satchels, but that is a bit cumbersome.