A bucket full of dice - how the dice have changed in T&T through the ages

Like I wrote in my last post, it seems the biggest issue people are having with dT&T who have come to the game cold, are the dice pools. Since the basic combat mechanic is you roll all dice on one side of the conflict, add it up and subtract from the sum of the other side, you will roll a lot of dice. There ways to either roll fewer, or to sum them up, but I'm going to focus on the historical perspective.

So, was the game always like this? Let's take out the old books. I have in my possession the 1st ed reprint, the 2nd ed, the British 1st ed (1st ed with The T&T supplement included), 5th ed, 7th ed, the revised 7th ed and now dT&T.

Let's take a look at how some of the weapons have looked like through the ages.

Greatsword

1st	2nd	1st British	5th	7th	8th
3d+3	3d+3	3d+3	6	6	7

Bastard sword

1st	2nd	1st British	5th	7th	8th
3	3	3	5	5	5

Great axe

1st	2nd	1st British	5th	7th	8th
4d+3	4d+3	4d+3	5d+3	5d+3	7

Can you also see a trend here? I could take more examples, but I think the point I'm trying to make is clear. The game has become more unwieldy because of  dice inflation.

It kind of reminds me of how D&D grew out of proportions in 4th ed. where the hit points of both player characters and monsters were in the hundreds! The game wont feel more epic if all numbers are raised, it will only take longer to play. I think WotC proved that for all of us who played that edition of D&D. But, wait! Did T&T raise all numbers? Let's look at some armor.

Plate

1st	2nd	1st British	5th	7th	8th
10	10	10	14	18	16

Scale

1st	2nd	1st British	5th	7th	8th
4	4	4	8	8	10

Even though the Plate armor is not increasing all the way, we see the trend here as well. The fact is, the situation is more complex than it seems. In the earliest editions, armor was ablative! That 18 points of damage reduction you get in 7th ed is even better than the 10->18 step looks like!

So, the damage dealt have increased, and the damage absorbed by armor have increased. You could try to figure out the relation between those, but I will just state that in that increase you have also increased another thing. The time it takes to resolve a combat.

In my next post I will take a look at some other rules that have changed during the years, and in the final post I will serve up my take on how I would use the rules in my game.

Old D&D editions and clones - Tunnels & Trolls 1st ed.

Now, some of you might object to that title. Surely T&T is not a clone of D&D, and it surely isn't an old D&D edition!? No, it is not, but it is the first published game inspired by D&D and it fits right in here in the series about how much the old games inspire and engage today.

Those of you who have read or played later editions of T&T should really take a peek at this edition if you get the opportunity! I own the 2013 reprint, which might be available yet. I do not know. Anyway. What's interesting about this game are two things, how it differs from later T&T editions and how it differs from D&D.

I found it interesting that on the first page you get a short summary of how to run a game as a GM, how to play it as a player and even the point of sitting around the table talking get across well. I like it a lot. This little section is actually a fairly good primer of what it's all about. Fun details is that the caller is mentioned, as the "Voicer".

There are many fun small idiosyncrasies in this game, but most of it is in the presentation that is extremely colloquial. Ken even jokes about the illustrations right beside the current paragraph. The rules are fairly easy and smooth and there are not multiple odd subsystems.

I like some of the advice for how to run the game, like the emphasize on house ruling, "this is not my game". It is a hack of another game that grew into its own and it is paying its dues. Then there's the suggestion to put in lot of stuff in the dungeons, since "Nobody likes to mess around in a dull dungeon". Here I think Ken is onto something. The big empty dungeon is something I feel have been overvalued in the OSR conversations. I'm not so sure it was a regular feature of the Old Ways even.  Ken goes on with some other good advice suggesting that all the threats in the dungeon should be avoidable or be possible to nullify by smart players.

Much of the rules is as you'd expect, with the suggestion you start with a horisontal cut away fo your multi level dungeon, and there are rules for reaction rolls and capturing monsters. I also love the fact that there are names to the character levels. A Veteran is someone who has reached 3rd level, by the way. Not first.

Comparing this to modern versions of T&T and there are some differences. Armour is ablative, Saving Rolls are mainly done on Luck and you get XP for gold and deepest dungeon level penetrated.

I would actually gladly pick up those for all editions, liking them a lot. In general, I like this edition a lot. Expanding Saving Rolls into the "meta mechanic" it got later on and I feel you've almost hit the sweet spot for T&T rules. There's a rawness to the rules, but it's brimming with enthusiasm and small snippets of the life in the Phoenix campaign, like how they all have 3-15 characters per player! For me the rules feels like a big smiling invitation to just roll some dice and dive in the deep end. This is another winner. I really want to play this game!

[DragonQuest] Shields will be splitered!

I found this reading DragonQuest yesterday:

[18.3] Grievous Injury may result if the successful Strike Check is 5% or less of the Modified Strike Chance. 
...
A figure who suffers a Grievous Injury while wearing armor has the Protection Rating of that suit of armor reduced by 2 until repaired. Optionally, a figure who is also carrying a shield can choose to have the shield cloven and spare his armor. A cloven shield is useless.

Shields will be splintered, eh? I really like the idea with ablative armor, like in older T&T editions. Try that one out with D&D and let me know how that works! Should drain some money from those rich coffers.

Ways to spend money in a T&T game

I have been thinking about money, experience and T&T a long time. Long time reader of my blog knows that I really like the xp for gold rule in old D&D. I idea behind it is good, and I have been wanting to try it for T&T a while now. Ken St. Andre used that rule for T&T in earlier editions, but decided to skip it when it became clear that it caused problems with Monty Haul campaigns. With the provision that you have to spend the gold to exchange it for Adventure Points I think that problem can be avoided. Worth testing, I think.

When I refereed a weekly campaign of 7th ed T&T it became clear quite quickly that after a few delves to the megadungeon everyone had the best armour and weapon they could wield. If you take a look at the price list in the T&T, you find that most of the gear is affordable. The only thing that costs a lot is buying new spells. My players pooled their resources and bought a few key spells like Whammy, Omnipotent Eye and Poor Baby. I will talk about Dura-Spell Battery some other day. But, having bought those they had what they needed and once again had an a lot of loose cash.

Some might say it's a very GM centred problem to have to much gold in a campaign. While it's true to some extent I think I was fairly restrictive and when the characters did hit upon a hoard it was fun and not Monty Haul. They fought for it.

What can you spend your hard earned gold on then? Well, I guess you can buy magic items, but I like to think they feel more interesting if they are found in a dark dungeon than made to order in a craftman's shop. I did let my players buy some items, and I probably should have but more magic treasure in the game instead. But, I like to think that some of the items they did find felt interesting and wondrous enough.

But today I read something about ablative armour, again. For those who don't know, protective gear used to be worn down in earlier editions. I kind of dislike the idea of book keeping reduced hits on armour, but Dan in the post linked above gave me a new reason to reconsider it. He mentions having to spend money on repairing your gear once now and then when they take punishment from action. That is a very interesting way to part the characters from some money! I had never thought of it from that standpoint before. Worth considering, I guess.