B/X Monsters - Carrion Crawler

Two thoughts about the Carrion Crawler:
1. What is it about the illustration of the Carrion Crawler? I remember being fascinated by it as a kid and now my kids are fascinated by it.

2. Eight tentacles! Yipes. Given that they are each 2 feet long and a Carrion Crawler is 3 feet tall, I would guesstimate that the spread of tentacles would be about 5 to 6 feet. Put a Carrion Crawler in the middle of a 10 ft wide dungeon corridor and you have a wall of tentacles coming at you. A Carrion Crawler hits Armour Class 2 35% of the time and with eight attacks each round the characters are looking at making a lot of saving throws.

B/X Monsters - Bandits

Another "man-monster", bandits to me really reinforce the relative differences between adventurers, monsters and normal men as discussed in the excellent post by JB on B/X Blackrazor.

We are told that bandits are NPC thieves that have banded together for the purpose of robbing others. Looking at the entries for bandits and normal men we can see that bandits have on average nearly twice as many hit points and are +1 better to hit compared to normal men. Their dangerous and nefarious lifestyles make bandits far more dangerous than normal men. The average farmer would be terrified of a group of bandits as they could easily take what they wanted and kill him and his family.

We are told that bandits have a leader that can be of any class. This leaves open many possible adventure hooks. A bandit group led by a magic-user could have very different goals than one led by a cleric or thief.

Looking at the Wilderness Encounter Table - Subtable: Men on page X57, bandits can be found in nearly all terrain types, except desert and ocean where they are replaced by dervishes and pirates respectively. Bandits are more likely to be found in "Inhabited" or "City" areas which makes sense since you need other people to rob.

In my games, bandits are often one of the most common monsters.

I would like to come up with an adventure hook involving a group of bandits led by a cleric that are hiding out in a jungle.

B/X King of the Ring: Clerics vs Fighters

In the comments to the post: Does the B/X Fighter need to be Buffed? K-Slacker mentions how he doesn't like that at times the Cleric surpasses the Fighter in fighting ability. Now, I've never really examined this in detail before. I put the following tables in the comments section to that post but I wanted to pull them into a post of their own.

Table 1: Cleric vs Fighter THAC0
XP..…CLevel..….CTHAC0……Flevel……..FTHAC0
0………….1………………19………………1……………….19
1500……..2………………19………………1……………...19
3000……..3………………19………………2……………...19
6000……..4………………19………………3……………...19
12000…….5……………..17………………4……………...17
25000…….6……………..17………………5……………...17
50000…….7……………..17………………6……………...17
100000…..8……………..17………………7……………...14
200000…..9……………..14………………8……………...14
300000….10…………….14……………….9……………..14
400000….11…………….14……………..10……………..12
500000….12…………….14……………..11……………..12
600000….13…………….12……………..12……………..12
700000….14…………….12……………..12……………..12

Table 2: Cleric vs Fighter Average Hit Points
XP..…CLevel..….CAvgHP……Flevel……..FAvgHP
0………….1………………3.5…..………1……………….4.5
1500……..2………………7………………1………………4.5
3000……..3………………10.5……………2………….…9
6000……..4………………14………………3………………13.5
12000…….5……………..17.5……………4………………18
25000…….6……………..21………………5………………22.5
50000…….7……………..24.5……………6………………27
100000…..8……………..28………………7………………31.5
200000…..9……………..31.5……………8………………36
300000….10…………….35……………….9……………..40.5
400000….11…………….38.5…………..10……………..45
500000….12…………….42……………..11……………..49.5
600000….13…………….45.5…………..12……………..54
700000….14…………….49……………..12……………..54

So yes, from a hit point perspective the Cleric does intermittently surpass Fighters at low (from 1,500 to 12,000) experience point levels. However, I don't think the discrepancy is enough to tip the scales too far in the Clerics favour as the discrepancy only lasts for a short time.

Also, if the optional variable damage system is used, the damage output of the fighter will likely be higher as they will likely have a weapon that will do at least 1d8 damage and they might have a strength based damage bonus. Also fighters will likely have any magic swords that are found.

Screwing Magic-Users

In the comments of my previous post Will says:

"Regarding the "by the book rules for spellbooks": I suppose if you really want to run it that way, nobody can stop you, but I think it's a clear case of adhering to the letter of the rules rather than their spirit, since context (every version of the game before and since) makes it clear that this is a simple misinterpretation. I'd never make run a M-U in a game with that rule in effect, because I'd obviously be getting screwed."

Two comments:
1. B/X was the first version of D&D I played. I picked up Moldvay's basic set when I was 10 years old and played that for five years before I picked up the AD&D PHB. I don't see how using the B/X rulebooks as written could possibly be a misinterpretation. I would contend that anyone that doesn't use this rule is house ruling their B/X game. Which is fine. I house rule some aspects of my game as well.

2. I don't think the rule as written obviously screws the magic-user. Sure it limits his versatility but page X11 says, "Magic-users and elves must be taught their new spells… Either the player or the DM may choose any new spells." I usually run this as various high level magic-users have their own specific spellbooks. Some will be famous for having certain spells such as the witch in the swamp that can communicate with otherworldly beings (Contact Higher Plane) or the Ice Mage that lives in the castle on top of a glacier (Wall of Ice). When a PC magic-user wants to learn a new spell they can do some research about who has the desired spell already in their spellbook and can then go an approach that magic-user about learning the spell from them. This allows players to customize their magic-user exactly the way they want and gives numerous adventure and roleplaying opportunities.

I agree that some players will dislike the limitations placed upon magic-users by using this rule. That's fine. I don't like playing clerics. Everyone has their own preferences. However, I like the rule and plan to continue to use it in my B/X games.

What do you think? Does the rule limit magic-users and elves too much?

Does the B/X Fighter need to be "buffed"?

A little while ago a short thread started on Dragonsfoot about adding multiple attacks for fighters as they advance in levels. The thread specifically focused on BECMI but that is close enough to B/X for me to comment.

The thesis put forward in the thread is that the damage output of fighters is dwarfed by spellcasters in later levels and that by adding extra attacks the fighter can keep up.

I don't think this is necessary. One of the reasons why I love B/X is that the by-the-book rules for spellbooks (whether intentionally written this way or not) is that magic-users and elves may only have as many spells in their spellbook as they are able to cast each day. I believe that this limits spellcasters so that such tweaks are unnecessary. Yes, a couple of times per day they may be able do things the fighter can't but the magic-user's limited resources and versatility keeps the fighter very relevant.

What do you think? Do B/X fighters need "buffing"?

B/X Monsters - White Ape

White apes are one of my favourite monsters. They illicit a strong sword & sorcery vibe. If I make up the tower of a decadent wizard, odds are that I included a white ape inside as a guard. White apes are tough (HD 4) and quick (move 120') but they are fairly easy to hit (AC 6) and don't cause too much damage with their two attacks (1-4 each). They also have ranged attack - they may throw stones for 1d6 damage.

Another reason why I like them is that they are associated with Neanderthals which I also really like for their S&S vibe.

B/X Monsters - Acolyte

The Acolyte is one of many "man-monsters" in the B/X rules. The roster of man-monsters and lost world monsters are part of what I believe gives B/X a certain flavour. So let's look at the Acolyte…

They have an armour class of 2 which isn't surprising given the low cost of platemail in B/X. This makes them tough foes for low level PCs as they would have a low probability of hitting.

An odd fact is that acolytes have 1 hit dice of the d8 variety even though clerics are only 1d6. Tougher than the average 1st level cleric. Like other 1st level clerics though, an acolyte doesn't have any cleric spells.

Acolytes are on a pilgrimage and are found in groups of 1 to 8 in a 1st level dungeon or 1 to 20 in the wilderness. They will all be of the same alignment with an equal chance of being lawful, neutral or chaotic. This raises a number of interesting possibilities such as a party encountering a group of lawful acolytes on a pilgrimage in a dungeon that is the lair of a bunch of chaotic monsters. Why are they there? Where are they going or where are they returning from? Or maybe the party encounters a large group of chaotic pilgrims in the wilderness. With the low AC, a low level party better hope for a good reaction roll!

While all acolytes will be of the same alignment, the monster listing doesn't mention anything about their god/goddess. Do they all worship the same god or do they worship a pantheon of gods all of the same alignment?

Acolytes may be accompanied by a leader of 2nd to 5th level. The leader's spells may be chosen by the DM or determined randomly. With my love of randomness, I would roll for them. I would love to try to figure out why a Vicar of Chaos has Speak with Animals memorized.

Acolytes have treasure type U which means that the acolyte likely has 5 cp, 5 sp and 5 gp. 1-in-20 will have some gems or jewelry. 1-in-50 will also have a magic item - maybe a holy artifact.

What cover do I picture?

This one is a no-brainer.