How to Survive Low Levels

[VoxRationis]

I'm trying to set up an AD&D game for the near future, and I'm confused as to how I'll keep the players alive past the first level. Now, I'm used to playing fragile characters in 3.5, but AD&D characters seem remarkably less powerful at low levels. Wizards only get one spell per day, everyone's hit chances are not particularly good since THAC0 is 20 for all classes at level 1 and it's tough to get any reliable bonuses to attack, thieves can't rely on their skills... How does anyone survive the first dungeon? Is there a playstyle difference I don't know about? Is dungeon design less combat-intensive or otherwise playing softball? Do low-level monsters usually come without armor?

[LibraryOgre]

Low level monsters usually do have less armor... 8-6 ACs aren't uncommon, similar to 12-14 for 3.x. They also have fewer HP, since most creatures don't have bonus HP from Constitution (most don't even have a listed constitution). No monster has a bonus to AC from Dex, because they don't have a listed Dex. Generally, the numbers involved are smaller.

A Few things:
1) Terrain and tactics. The "Conga Line of Death", by which you entice monsters to come at you in a narrow hallway, decreasing the usefulness of their numbers, is a useful tactic. Slay and retreat. Scout. Your thief isn't an assassination missile; he gives you numbers and information to plan your attack.

2) Wizards have fewer spells, but this means selection and choice are crucial. Sleep has no save; it simply drops 2d4 HD of foes who have less than 4HD a piece. Bonuses are less common, so that means the +1 to hit from Bless is huge.

3) Thieves specialize in 2e. Generally, a 1st level thief should pick 2 skills to be really good at... MS/HIS, OL/FRT are the two usual ones. Remember that elves and halflings can scout near invisibly if they're alone. Having two thieves means they should have different specialties.

4) People die. 1st level characters are fairly expendable. Caution rules the day. You take what steps you can to reduce casualties, but a strong hit and suddenly there's brains on the floor.

[thirdkingdom]

Though about B/X and not 2e this thread may have some insight: https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php...rated-dungeons

Long story short, Sleep and Charm are the players' friends, as is burning oil. As a DM, don't forget to make reaction rolls and morale checks for monsters.

[VoxRationis]

As a DM, don't forget to make reaction rolls and morale checks for monsters.

That's something I often forget about. I'll be sure to have terrain such that retreat is often feasible for both sides. Do people have good ideas about how to effect that?

[Mutazoia]

Earlier editions of D&D (pre 3.X) also worked on a "you don't have to fight everything you see" motif. Find ways to get around an encounter, such as using spells creatively, try to set up an ambush, or simply say "nope" and walk away if you're worried you can't cut it.

[Khedrac]

Earlier editions of D&D (pre 3.X) also worked on a "you don't have to fight everything you see" motif. Find ways to get around an encounter, such as using spells creatively, try to set up an ambush, or simply say "nope" and walk away if you're worried you can't cut it.

This - very much this.

Also, as a DM remember morale checks - they are there for a reason. More to the point, check the triggers for morale checks, the first check happens surprisingly early in a fight. If the opponents break and run they are not going to be killing any (more) PCs.

[Jay R]

Can I talk to it?

If not, can I avoid it?

If not, can I run from it?

Does it have anything worth risking my life for?

If so, then, and only then, should you even begin to consider the possibility of fighting it.

Fighting is a last resort for low-level characters.

[Telok]

Can I jam the door shut, dig a small hole under it, flood the room with lamp oil, and solve the problem with fire?

Be aware that melty lumps of mixed copper, silver, and gold are a nuisance to cash in.

[Thrudd]

It's not your job to keep the players alive, that's their job. Your job is to give them reasonable challenges. Yes, a single arrow or dagger can take a character out. They know that and should act accordingly. Sometimes bad choices or bad luck gets a character killed. That's ok. The players will eventually escape the low levels and become more sturdy, just maybe not with all the same characters they started with.

See the AD&D modules and the wandering monster tables for an idea what things were thought to be appropriate for different levels.

[Jay R]

Be aware that melty lumps of mixed copper, silver, and gold are a nuisance to cash in.

Who cares? Once I get the experience points for it, spending it is low priority.

[RazorChain]

Get +2 Con modifier, especially important for Mages...and helpful for Rogues. Utilize the rule that allows you to go to -10 HP and then you die (Bleed for 1 HP every round until stabilized).

[hifidelity2]

^^ above and we use the house rule of Max HP at 1st level so no die roll just 4HP (plus con for wizard etc)

[thirdkingdom]

I'm trying to set up an AD&D game for the near future, and I'm confused as to how I'll keep the players alive past the first level. Now, I'm used to playing fragile characters in 3.5, but AD&D characters seem remarkably less powerful at low levels. Wizards only get one spell per day, everyone's hit chances are not particularly good since THAC0 is 20 for all classes at level 1 and it's tough to get any reliable bonuses to attack, thieves can't rely on their skills... How does anyone survive the first dungeon? Is there a playstyle difference I don't know about? Is dungeon design less combat-intensive or otherwise playing softball? Do low-level monsters usually come without armor?

Get +2 Con modifier, especially important for Mages...and helpful for Rogues. Utilize the rule that allows you to go to -10 HP and then you die (Bleed for 1 HP every round until stabilized).

What's a "Rogue"?

[Jay R]

What's a "Rogue"?

In 2e, Rogue is a general category that includes both Thieves and Bards. See PHB, p. 38.

[thirdkingdom]

In 2e, Rogue is a general category that includes both Thieves and Bards. See PHB, p. 38.

That was supposed to be a joke :(

[MeeposFire]

Use the treasure gives XP rules (they exist though many forget or do not know they are there) as that will make avoiding combat more important.

Players can also use ranged weapons as much as possible. It won't work all the time but using bows, daggers, and darts grants more attacks at a difference so your offense and defense are better relative to melee combat (though having a guy in the best armor and a shield can help keep some guys off your archers).



These are of course ideas using the actual rules you can make up some house rules to improve the lethality for the table. Some people like that lethality but it is not for everyone. For instance you can use the rules for death from 5e.

[D+1]

I'm trying to set up an AD&D game for the near future, and I'm confused as to how I'll keep the players alive past the first level.

This is where you're making a mistake. It isn't YOUR job to ensure that the PC's stay alive. It's THEIR JOB. Oh, you have to plan a bit so as to not INTENTIONALLY kill them - or at least not kill them all in a TPK - but ultimately that is the point of the game. At the lowest levels in AD&D mere survival is the players biggest challenge. If you remove that challenge then you're undermining the whole game.

The PC's will be underpowered, underequipped, outnumbered, and habitually flirting with disaster just by walking into a dungeon AT ALL. You can't eliminate that and you don't want to.

They need to deal with being underpowered by taking advantage of tactics and strategies that are easily ignored once they have a level or two under their belts. They need to NOT just charge in headlong but draw enemies to choke points, burn them out, starve them, pick them off one by one, DIVIDE and then conquer. They can buy a few guard dogs to augment their striking power. They can hire a few red-shirt troops to help guard the magic-user and soak up at least a few hits before being killed. The matter of being underequipped tends to disappear rapidly (at least as far as MUNDANE equipment goes.) It doesn't take long for the party to gain enough money for fighters to buy better armor and weapons. After just one adventure they'll be able to afford to hire hirelings to carry ropes, chests of loot, and hundreds of additional arrows and spears. They need to be PARANOID as they move through a dungeon. They need to proceed with extreme caution, silence, and careful planning and constant re-assessment. They need to CAREFULLY consider simple matters of who stands where in the marching order.

But all of that is THEIR responsibility - not yours. In AD&D PC's will die. It's inevitable. Even if the players do everything right the dice will be cruel and naturally select a few PC's to get killed until the party as a whole has advanced a bit. Then those chances of random death will be reduced but not eliminated. ONLY OVER TIME will they be able to simply rely on their own inherent survivability with any amount of confidence. Until then they have to WORK FOR IT.

That is the inherent difference between AD&D and any newer version. AD&D is not balanced. It isn't geared to ENSURE anyone's survival. It isn't geared to ensure that all characters are equally useful at all levels. Wizards are WEAK and largely worthless for several levels. It's not your job as DM to fix that (although much CAN be done for wizards if you really want to), but the job of the PLAYER to endure it, to act carefully, and to accept the fact that his character is weak and worthless and if something is to be done about it it's up to THE PLAYER, not the game rules and not the DM.

Wizards only get one spell per day, everyone's hit chances are not particularly good since THAC0 is 20 for all classes at level 1 and it's tough to get any reliable bonuses to attack, thieves can't rely on their skills... How does anyone survive the first dungeon?

As for thieves, yes their skills are NOT reliable. So players need to be more careful about what they do and how they do it. As a thief you have to WORK and wait patiently for opportunities to attempt backstabs. You have to accept that you'll fail - A LOT. Your forte is not now and never will be combat. Even opening locks and dealing with traps is going to be unreliable and dangerous - and that's going to be your primary job! But that's the lot the player will have CHOSEN. THEY need to come to grips with it and find ways to overcome their characters own deficiencies.

Of course, there are things a DM can do to "fix" thieves just as there are things to do to "fix" wizards, but...

Is there a playstyle difference I don't know about?

THIS is really your answer. Low-level AD&D gameplay is simply DIFFERENT than in other editions. It is different in the same way that mid-level gameplay is very different from epic-level gameplay. The goal is survival and it's not a goal that the game itself is especially concerned with seeing to it that the PC's will succeed. HANDLING that challenge of survival is supposed to be what the early game revolves around and isn't something the DM is really supposed to do FOR the players.

Is dungeon design less combat-intensive or otherwise playing softball? Do low-level monsters usually come without armor?

Use small monsters. Use FEW monsters.

If you're playing close to the rules then players should learn that surprise is deadly. If enemies get surprise on them then it's the PC's that will die - but if players get surprise on their enemies then it is a HUGE advantage at low levels. Fights can be over almost before they start. Bow users in particular gain overpowered advantages. Gameplay should not be just kick-in-the-door and charge in. What's beyond the door? How many are there? What's the area beyond the door LOOK like? How can we surprise them best? How can we put them at a disadvantage? What's around here that we can use against them?

The gameplay is not a matter of simply selecting from your characters lists of powers, it is devising plans and strategies as you go to make up for the fact that YOU DON'T HAVE lists of powers. Even if you do they are powers that you typically can't rely on to succeed. At least not yet...

[Jay R]

That was supposed to be a joke :(

Sorry. It read like you were one of the people who have forgotten that Rogues don't exist in 2e.

[Lo'Tek]

Ironically low level gameplay in AD&D 2nd has little to do with dungeons and almost nothing to do with dragons.
In my opinion it is mostly about roleplaying.

At level one new players should get a grasp what roleplaying is and how the rules work.
People here tell you about the sleep spell, lamp oil traps and avarage bow damage per turn, because they assume tenth level player knowledge stuffed in a level one body.

Do your players have experience with AD&D? With pen and paper rpgs in general?
Do they tend to read every how to break the system guide on the net?
If not you should not assume that they know this stuff.

Sure if they are well prepared power gamers, give them a quest where they have to use everything at their disposal to stay alive.
Else give them a fetch quest. Let the apprentice mage gather some spell components, let the fighter have a sparring match at the guild so the players know what "20 thac 0" means.

And most important give them oppertunities to flesh out their characters.

Surviving at low levels is quite easy, if the players understand that they are not playing Diablo. Sometimes "Investigate the danger deep in the mine" does not mean "slay ten orcs" but "report back that there are orcs down there".

But that is just my personal preference, as it annoys me, when role play turns into hack and slay. For me AD&D is not about killing my way through the monster manual in the hope of getting random loot that improves my damage per turn by 0.5 points.

[VoxRationis]

Thank you all for your input. Does anyone have ideas about ways in which to make retreats survivable? In my experience with D&D, retreating tends to mean "dying ignobly rather than nobly." Consequently, my NPCs (and players at my table, whether I'm DMing or playing) tend to make fights do-or-die scenarios, simply because they know that if they keep fighting, they might win, but if they break, they will die. Is there a good way around that besides making fights into archery duels across chasms?

[MeeposFire]

Thank you all for your input. Does anyone have ideas about ways in which to make retreats survivable? In my experience with D&D, retreating tends to mean "dying ignobly rather than nobly." Consequently, my NPCs (and players at my table, whether I'm DMing or playing) tend to make fights do-or-die scenarios, simply because they know that if they keep fighting, they might win, but if they break, they will die. Is there a good way around that besides making fights into archery duels across chasms?

Using the morale rules help. Having some or many of the enemy turn tail and run because of a lucky hit or two can help survivability and is more realistic than you might think. Alternatively you can just declare they run away but you do need to give a reason.


Also instead of killing the party have them be captured instead. Escaping from confinement is classic and can be fun.

[Thrudd]

Thank you all for your input. Does anyone have ideas about ways in which to make retreats survivable? In my experience with D&D, retreating tends to mean "dying ignobly rather than nobly." Consequently, my NPCs (and players at my table, whether I'm DMing or playing) tend to make fights do-or-die scenarios, simply because they know that if they keep fighting, they might win, but if they break, they will die. Is there a good way around that besides making fights into archery duels across chasms?

Only those engaged in melee will suffer a single free attack when they turn and run. If that attack doesn't kill them, then the chase is on.

Consider the intelligence, motives and personality of the combatants. Not every situation warrants pursuit. If the enemies have been hurt in the fight, they might choose to regroup rather than chase. If they are defending a specific place, they may have orders not to leave. If it was a chance encounter, there might be no motive or desire to give chase.

The fleeing party could drop things that might slow down or stop the pursuers - hungry monsters might stop for food, slightly smarter creatures might stop for treasure or shiny things. Some spells are perfect for throwing off pursuers, if you allow casting of dancing lights, audible glamer or illusions on the run, pursuers could be misled into stopping or taking a wrong path.

Also, the environment within which the pursuit is taking place needs to be taken into account.
When retreating in underground dungeon-like settings, if the party can get to an intersection without being seen, it's possible the pursuers will choose the wrong path and miss them.
Outdoors, evading pursuit could be easier than in enclosed places - with terrain like trees to obscure vision.

2e didn't address it, but 1e AD&D had rules/guidelines for pursuit and evasion with percentages for different situations based on all the factors I mentioned. Of course, the movement rates of the parties involved is the biggest factor. If the pursuers are significantly faster than the pursued, it will be hard to get away.

[Lord Torath]

Most of the low-level opponents (orcs, goblins, kobolds, lizardmenfolk, etc.) have a move speed of 6-9 (60 to 90 yards per minute), while most PCs have a starting move of 12. So if the party opts to flee, they should be able to do so.

[JadedDM]

Only those engaged in melee will suffer a single free attack when they turn and run. If that attack doesn't kill them, then the chase is on.

Also consider the difference between withdrawing and running (as explained in the DMG). If you slowly withdraw from an opponent (facing them, moving at 1/3 movement speed), they don't get a free attack. That only happens if you turn your back on them and try to bolt.

Running away in AD&D is more of a strategic exercise that needs to be carefully done. If your players just turn and run, yeah, they'll likely get hurt or even killed in the process.

[Magua]

Something that I picked up from the Fellowship of the Bling was that if you award XP for monsters defeated rather than monsters slain, 1st level PCs that can be killed by a single lucky hit are very unlikely to chase fleeing monsters to begin with. Once the PCs have seen monsters successfully flee two or three times, they'll hopefully pick up that they can do it themselves.

[Eldariel]

Don't forget hired aid, beasts, etc. In all the older editions really, if you want to survive you typically have some other even more expendable party in the front of the party - whether you hired them, coerced them, tricked them, own them or whatever, it doesn't matter. What matters is that it's not you walking into that ambush. And in general, look for easy safe targets and loot, not for trouble. You don't want to fight anything you don't vastly outnumber. The game is about winning before the fight even begins. And yeah, as said before, Wizard might know only one spell but Sleep is going to just nuke encounters (much like in 3.X in fact).

[LibraryOgre]

Low-level D&D is less "Conan" and more "Opening sequence to Saving Private Ryan". Did you survive that? Good. You're 2nd level now.

[thirdkingdom]

Only those engaged in melee will suffer a single free attack when they turn and run. If that attack doesn't kill them, then the chase is on.

Consider the intelligence, motives and personality of the combatants. Not every situation warrants pursuit. If the enemies have been hurt in the fight, they might choose to regroup rather than chase. If they are defending a specific place, they may have orders not to leave. If it was a chance encounter, there might be no motive or desire to give chase.

The fleeing party could drop things that might slow down or stop the pursuers - hungry monsters might stop for food, slightly smarter creatures might stop for treasure or shiny things. Some spells are perfect for throwing off pursuers, if you allow casting of dancing lights, audible glamer or illusions on the run, pursuers could be misled into stopping or taking a wrong path.

Also, the environment within which the pursuit is taking place needs to be taken into account.
When retreating in underground dungeon-like settings, if the party can get to an intersection without being seen, it's possible the pursuers will choose the wrong path and miss them.
Outdoors, evading pursuit could be easier than in enclosed places - with terrain like trees to obscure vision.

2e didn't address it, but 1e AD&D had rules/guidelines for pursuit and evasion with percentages for different situations based on all the factors I mentioned. Of course, the movement rates of the parties involved is the biggest factor. If the pursuers are significantly faster than the pursued, it will be hard to get away.

I don't have my B/X or 1e rules handy, but ACKS (based on B/X) has this to say about pursuit (emphasis mine):

A monster will stop chasing the adventurers if they manage to get out of the monster’s range of vision. If the monsters enjoy treasure, they have a 50% probability that they will stop pursuing characters to collect any treasure the characters drop (roll 4-6 on 1d6). Hungry or less intelligent monsters may do the same if the characters drop food.

[D+1]

Thank you all for your input. Does anyone have ideas about ways in which to make retreats survivable? In my experience with D&D, retreating tends to mean "dying ignobly rather than nobly." Consequently, my NPCs (and players at my table, whether I'm DMing or playing) tend to make fights do-or-die scenarios, simply because they know that if they keep fighting, they might win, but if they break, they will die. Is there a good way around that besides making fights into archery duels across chasms?

If the PC's want to flee - LET THEM. IME, that's all there is to it.

If the PC's stop, turn around, and go back then SHOW NO MERCY. But if they're genuinely looking to escape then EVERY time you have the opponents chase after them you only prove yet again that there ISN'T a choice - once a fight starts it's win-or-die. You must ALLOW PC's to successfully flee if they select that option or it just is NOT an option.

AD&D has no chase rules and regular movement rules just don't make decent provisions for a tactical withdrawl. In fact, btb in 1E and 2E, FLEEING combat instantly subjects any character already in combat to a free attack (doesn't even count against the opponent's normal number of attacks) which is made against the fleeing characters then utterly undefended backside. Now, that MIGHT be a painful but viable option except that the opponent can then pursue - and that IS a problem. BTB, if the PC's have higher movement they outrun pursuit. If the opponents have higher movement and elect to pursue then the PC's CANNOT escape and there's little or nothing the PC's can do about it. If the two sides have equal movement rates then somebody has to give in - either the DM has the opponents give up fleeing/chasing, or the PC's collectively choose to give up fleeing/chasing. Well, it could come down to one side or another being forced to drop out from exhaustion but that's hardly worth consideration.

It's really an area that THE RULES don't handle well so the DM is forced to step in, kick THE RULES in the teeth and tell them, "_I_ run this show." Then it's either LET the PC's escape, or effectively teach them that there is NEVER any escape because escape relies upon the DM's arbitrary decision and that decision is demonstrably unreliable.

I suggest you announce to the players directly: "If you ever choose to flee, you will successfully flee excepting only if you just have nowhere to flee TO. However, if you start to flee and then turn back, I'll CRUCIFY YOU. You are being given this option. If you EVER try to abuse it, it WILL bite you in the ass - I will see to it." That makes it entirely a matter of the PLAYER'S choices and not insufficient rules mechanics which you then don't have to screw around with trying to make it work. If, as DM, you then ever have an opponent who you want to be the never-give-up-the-chase type just be sure the PC's know that going into the fight. You can't discredit PC's for failing to take precautions if they don't know that there's something out of the ordinary they need to be worried about. But if they have proper clues and warnings then it's up to them to accept the danger and take appropriate measures.

If a DM wants to kill the PC's then the PC's get killed. It is as easy as breathing. Killing PC's isn't hard. It's NOT killing them without overtly removing mortal danger from combats that is the challenge for DM's. But - IME - players must have a reliable option to flee if they are ever going to exercise that option or even consider it. If even once you demonstrate that they can't RELY on that as a last resort then they never, EVER will openly flee. TPK's happen for two reasons. Either, A) the PC's go into a fight not understanding they are outmatched and get killed before there is time to even adequately recognize the danger, or B) they chose not to flee because flight is not and never was a reasonably viable option compared to other alternatives (like simply not being able to run faster than their opponent). So, if they want to flee - just let them.

JMHO

[VoxRationis]

Low-level D&D is less "Conan" and more "Opening sequence to Saving Private Ryan". Did you survive that? Good. You're 2nd level now.

The problem is that I'd like the PCs to be able to be significant in terms of roleplaying and position before they become significantly strong on a mechanical level. Expendability runs counter to that; hence my interest in survivable defeats.

Don't forget hired aid, beasts, etc. In all the older editions really, if you want to survive you typically have some other even more expendable party in the front of the party - whether you hired them, coerced them, tricked them, own them or whatever, it doesn't matter. What matters is that it's not you walking into that ambush. And in general, look for easy safe targets and loot, not for trouble. You don't want to fight anything you don't vastly outnumber. The game is about winning before the fight even begins. And yeah, as said before, Wizard might know only one spell but Sleep is going to just nuke encounters (much like in 3.X in fact).

Expendable minions sound useful, and relevant to the party's position (they're supposed to be courtiers in a state of some significance). It'll also give a nice mechanical benefit to Charisma to emphasize minion-play.

I suggest you announce to the players directly: "If you ever choose to flee, you will successfully flee excepting only if you just have nowhere to flee TO. However, if you start to flee and then turn back, I'll CRUCIFY YOU. You are being given this option. If you EVER try to abuse it, it WILL bite you in the ass - I will see to it."

This seems a little metagame-y, doesn't it?