OSR Old school wizards, how do you play level 1?

I agree that they aren't "necessary" but I'm in the midst of running a long campaign for the first time in a system without hit points, and wow do hit points make life as a GM much easier. That ablative plot armor is almost better for GMs than it is for PCs because it allows you to prepare and run challenges in a much more predictable fashion. Without hit points, the line between an easy walk over and a TPK is just super narrow. Without hit points, too many things come down to single die rolls. Hit points mitigate against luck and let the dice fall where they may so much better than other concepts.
I agree. Especially for a game in which we want the characters to stick around and be part of ongoing narratives while still participating in battles on a regular basis.

You could also make a more abstract or less granular rule for injury and wounds, maybe something like the wound levels Ars Magica or the White Wolf Storyteller games used. But HP definitely serve the narrativist goal of having ongoing heroes who aren't quickly crippled or killed by regular participation in combat.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I agree. Especially for a game in which we want the characters to stick around and be part of ongoing narratives while still participating in battles on a regular basis.

You could also make a more abstract or less granular rule for injury and wounds, maybe something like the wound levels Ars Magica or the White Wolf Storyteller games used. But HP definitely serve the narrativist goal of having ongoing heroes who aren't quickly crippled or killed by regular participation in combat.
I prefer a modification of the hp system, where once you hit zero your condition is in question until someone checks on you. At that point you roll on a table corresponding to the type of injury that brought you down, factoring in modifiers such as healing herbs, magic, how long you've been down, how far below zero, etc. The result is the severity of your injury, and how must bed rest you need to recover.

This strongly encourages taking measures to stay upright during combat, as whack-a-mole is almost entirely eliminated.
 

I prefer a modification of the hp system, where once you hit zero your condition is in question until someone checks on you. At that point you roll on a table corresponding to the type of injury that brought you down, factoring in modifiers such as healing herbs, magic, how long you've been down, how far below zero, etc. The result is the severity of your injury, and how must bed rest you need to recover.

This strongly encourages taking measures to stay upright during combat, as whack-a-mole is almost entirely eliminated.
In theory I like The Nightmares Underneath's version too, where hit points are renamed "Disposition", and damage once you run out of Disposition goes against your Health score (equivalent of Constitution).

When Health is reduced you also suffer a location-based injury, with a chance of the location being incapacitated or maimed depending on the damage. Some forms of injury go straight to attributes as well, like falling, poison, life drain, torture, mind control, etc.

I'm a little worried that it'll turn out too fiddly in practice, but it sure looks cool.
 

We haven't met yet, but let me tell you I strongly believe in the opposite view. I prefer a simulationist approach to D&D-style traditional gaming, and want aspects of the setting modeled as closely to the world (that being for me real world reality unless obviously otherwise) as much as is practically possible. Things like experience points, leveling, and hit points, among others, are necessary abstractions needed for practical play. You include them because you have to IMO. When I have the option of choosing world-sense over game-sense, world wins.
I had been in the simulationist path for a long time, and I know the thrill of creating a fantasy world that make sense. But for me at the end the “world sense” collapse every time we play in it enough.

So it is now game first. And in that way I give the advice to start at higher level even if the characters pretend to be inexperienced. Just pretend they are better trained and prepared or gifted if you need a logical explanation.
 

I had been in the simulationist path for a long time, and I know the thrill of creating a fantasy world that make sense. But for me at the end the “world sense” collapse every time we play in it enough.

So it is now game first. And in that way I give the advice to start at higher level even if the characters pretend to be inexperienced. Just pretend they are better trained and prepared or gifted if you need a logical explanation.
We should all engage with the game the way that is most fun for us, so long as we're not dissing the way other players have fun.
 

This strongly encourages taking measures to stay upright during combat, as whack-a-mole is almost entirely eliminated.
AD&D doesn't have a whack-a-mole issue without first house-ruling it in, because btb if you go to 0hp or lower you're in a coma for 1-6 turns, then dealing with 1 week minimum of bedrest, regardless of what put you under and what healing you received after. It's the rule for 1E anyway (DMG p. 82 under "Zero Hit Points"). Can't remember specifically about 2E.
 

AD&D doesn't have a whack-a-mole issue without first house-ruling it in, because btb if you go to 0hp or lower you're in a coma for 1-6 turns, then dealing with 1 week minimum of bedrest, regardless of what put you under and what healing you received after. It's the rule for 1E anyway (DMG p. 82 under "Zero Hit Points"). Can't remember specifically about 2E.
Yeah, AD&D is great that way, and if my wife didn't hate OSR play I would play it or something like it. I was referring to my idealized play, and/or things I can adjust to make modern editions (like my favorite Level Up) play even more like I prefer.
 

AD&D doesn't have a whack-a-mole issue without first house-ruling it in, because btb if you go to 0hp or lower you're in a coma for 1-6 turns, then dealing with 1 week minimum of bedrest, regardless of what put you under and what healing you received after. It's the rule for 1E anyway (DMG p. 82 under "Zero Hit Points"). Can't remember specifically about 2E.
2E offered a simplified version of the 1E rules as an optional rule (Hovering on Death's Door, DMG p75). Once a cure spell gets you to 1 HP you're basically useless until you get a full day's rest.

Hovering on Death’s Door (Optional Rule)

You may find that your campaign has become particularly deadly. Too many player characters are dying. If this happens, you may want to allow characters to survive for short periods of time even after their hit points reach or drop below 0,

When this rule is in use, a character can remain alive until his hit points reach -10. However, as soon as the character reaches 0 hit points, he falls to the ground unconscious.

Thereafter, he automatically loses one hit point each round. His survival from this point on depends on the quick thinking of his companions. If they reach the character before his hit points reach -10 and spend at least one round tending to his wounds (stanching the flow of blood, etc.), the character does not die immediately.

If the only action is to bind his wounds, the injured character no longer loses one hit point each round, but neither does he gain any. He remains unconscious and vulnerable to damage from further attacks.

If a cure spell of some type Is cast upon him, the character is immediately restored to 1 hit point—no more. Further cures do the character no good until he has had at least one day of rest. Until such time, he is weak and feeble, unable to fight and barely able to move. He must stop and rest often, can't cast spells (the shock of near death has wiped them from his mind), and is generally con fused and feverish. He is able to move and can hold somewhat disjointed conversations, and that's it.

If a heal spell is cast on the character, his hit points are restored as per the spell, and he has full vitality and wits. Any spells he may have known are still wiped from his memory, however. (Even this powerful spoil does not negate the shock of the experience.)
 

I don't. Played only one Wizard in 2ed. It died 20 minutes after first session started in stupid bar brawl. 2hp wizard killed by dwarf sailor with 1d3+1 knife. After that, i go MC route, first 2-3 levels of fighter, than go into wizard.

To be fair, lv 1 wizards weren't fun in 3ed. Hp got better, at least it's max hp at lv 1, and bonus hp starts with 12 con. Also, more spells (3 lv0, 1-2 lv1) so you have tiny bit more options to use actual magic. For low level campaigns, i much preferred warlocks. They at least felt like spell casters and were much more durable. D6 hp, light armor, 1d6 eldricht blast every round (60ft range touch attack), invocations. By the level 2, you have at will darkness and devil's sight to see in said darkness.
 

The problem with old-school wizards is that they are only cool in the context of old-school games.
When you have only one class that can use sleep or fireball, then the class has a real identity. For some players, the initial weakness of the class can be both a challenge and part of the PC's identity.
When there are also clerics, sorcerers, warlocks, and even bards (5e+) who get fireball, what is the point of being a wizard?
One of my frustrations with 3e+ games is the erosion of niche protection and class identity. Spellcasters are largely interchangeable, and mundane classes are given spells instead of unique abilities.
 

Remove ads

Top