Revision as of 20:21, 20 January 2026

Introducing Gameplay is an experimental work, tentatively identified as 1 of 6 volumes, which attempts to provide an explanation of how the rules of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons is understood and played. It is being provided free through this wiki and no other source at this time. The text of this page should be sufficient for understanding the rules; links that appear lead to alternatives of AD&D rules that occur elsewhere in this wiki. This work is meant to take advantage of the still-existing Online Game License, though if the OGL is or becomes defunct, I'm not likely to take this down.

Foreword

From the beginning of my gaming experience in September of 1979, the goal of explaining Dungeons & Dragons to someone who might wish to understand the game well enough to play without needing to observe others has long been the bane of D&D. Arguably, much of the problem is related to the cost of printing books, that requires that the whole of the game be explained within a set number of pages, with a limited number of diagrams, a limited size font for printing and the time required to fully produce a completely comprehensible set of rules. An alternate explanation for the failure these past decades comes from the lack of technical game comprehension within the designing community, which has always allowed itself to chase rabbits down holes that failed to provide contribute pathways to game payoffs, agency, feedback, tension, mastery and many other facets of game creation. In short, many "designers" were, in fact, amateurs throwing soup at a wall hoping it would improve the taste.

Another failing has been to retain aspects of game play that did not work for the sake of nostalgia or frank immovability, believing that change would somehow warp or lessen the effectiveness of game aspects that they preferred to leave warped or dysfunctional, as one might with dogma. Also, a pervasive resistance to a logical order, or a resistance to explain ideas as they become relevant, preferring to shift such explanations into glossaries, indexes or other removed parts of the work, forcing readers to jump back and forth throughout the text with growing despair and frustration. The belief remains that D&D cannot be explained linearly, that because multiple factors of the game influence each other simultaneously, that therefore the game can only be learned by looping through multiple experiences that must then be re-interpreted with later iterations of game play.

For the present, it's not desirable to state to what purpose these rules are designed to serve, beyond game play. Attempts to categorise the game's nature, or to state why the game is played, or to outline the game's organisation structure, only introduce terms that are unnecessary for learning the game's rules. So, these will not be invoked at this time, so as not to pollute the discourse with terms that cannot, up front, be understood out of context. Nor would it benefit the reader to be told ahead of time under which headings this book is organised, since that too would only introduce ideas and terms that, again, could not be grasped anyway. Further, the existing iterations of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, of which there are many, would at this time be of no benefit to the reader. Therefore, they can be put aside until later, when their comprehensibility becomes practical to relate.

We should understand that D&D as a concept has struggled since its invention, primarily because it introduced a notion that the inventors were in no way prepared to fully comprehend themselves. Worse still, the adherents that followed were not developers or inventors themselves, but postulants, so awed and enamoured with the originators that they have blindly and foolishly repeated their mistakes all of this time. Therefore, when we sit down to explain how to play AD&D, we cannot do so without also addressing the ways that it fumbles, how as a game it is poorly conceived, and that as an ideal form of game play it requires a willingness to cut out the discrete growths of arbitrariness as they're found, to reveal the healthy potential that remains.

What's to be looked for are two kinds of faulty concepts that masquerade as rules. The first of these is the adjudicator's fear of the game drifting beyond their control. It was imagined that if this should happen, the players would become too powerful, too overbalanced for the design— and thus it was seen as absolutely necessary for adjudicators to protect their authority in order to "control" the game and the players. This led to the creation of rules that were literally designed to dictate how the player was permitted to play the game—which is not how games work. Rules can bound the player's options... but they should not dictate those options.

The second mis-step AD&D takes is in promoting moments where the adjudicator is asked to make an assessment or judgment that functions deliberately outside the rules as written. Such cases include deliberately modifying a die roll, often secretly, or changing rewards based upon an evaluation of the game's difficulty—either for the players or against them. Neither is suitable... but the ideal is justified in that the DM should, for reasons that again assume the DM's right of justice, improve the game by instinct. Such ideals should be viewed in the same manner that we might have toward an umpire who called balls and strikes differently throughout a baseball game in order to provide a more uncertain game, these being viewed as "more exciting." This is precisely what a DM is encouraged to do in AD&D's rules, for precisely this reason.

"Excitement" is meant to arise from a contest under stable rules, not from an official invoking a self-assigned power to decide what others want.

Throughout the text, where these two forms of game structure appear, this text is not going to give them credence, as though they are rules like any other. Any stipulation that the DM should do such, or any rule that has clearly been designed to subvert the player's freedom of action, when that design is not explained or even acknowledge, shall be pointed out for what it is and then discarded from the subject of gameplay.

It will be necessary for the reader to have a copy of the three original books of AD&D, the Dungeon Masters Guide, the Players Handbook and the Monster Manual. Portions of these books shall occasionally be directly referred to; the content in these books will be intrinsic to the manner of the game's explanation; and no attempt shall be made to pretend that some part of these books do not exist. However, the content here shall not follow the books in structure. Instead, the content from various books will be brought together and melded, without continually providing page numbers or even which book is being quoted.

Rather, this book and those that follow it are designed to provide a reconstructed, merged rules explanation that treats the books as one fractured manuscript and then reassembles it into a more learnable sequence. It shall appear, occasionally, that things are overlooked, because they are not spoken of in the sequence the books provide. This shall certainly lead to the conclusion that much has been left out or missed, or deliberately discounted. Instead, it only means that much will be left to the appendices at the end, as flotsam and jetsam not necessary for inclusion in understanding the game's play or its structure. This shall be especially true of rules that might be played, but don't need to be played, to make a good game experience.

— Alexis Smolensk

Participants

All persons who participate in the game, henceforth tagged either AD&D or D&D, the latter of which should be viewed as a shortened form of the former, at technically "players" in the game sense, according to a dictionary definition of the word. However, awkwardly, one of the "players" is not referred to in-game as such, and for our convenience we'll refer to this individual as the role this special participant serves: that of "dungeon master." Othe participants, and there may be any number, depending on how many can be managed by the dungeon master, are yet called "players" within the game's lexicon.

The dungeon master's role is to host the game, adjudicate and explain the rules, provide context for what the players experience, act on behalf of instruments in the game that can function as obstacles, reward the players and ultimately correct elements of the game's rules that prove insufficient over time. To understand how these functions are carried out, it must first be understood that most or potentially all of the game's play occurs without standard physical game pieces, a physical board or physical representations of any kind; the only tools that must be present are first, dice of a particular geometric design, generating random numbers between 1 to 4 (d4), 1 to 6 (d6), 1 to 8 (d8), 1 to 10 (d10), 1 to 12 (d12) and 1 to 20 (d20). The designation "d20," or die-20, indicates a die with 20 sides that is rolled to produce numbers between 1 and 20. The shape of the dice varies — most people recognise a d6, or six-sided die, from other games. Before playing D&D, visiting the internet to get a good look at the dice used is a good idea. The other tools require a means of taking notes, either with pen/pencil and paper or upon an electronic device.

The Dungeon Master

This participant, who we may abbreviate as the DM, hosts the game by providing a space, a table, chairs, vittles and whatever else a host would normally provide, while taking a place at the head of the table where access to all players is convenient and beneficial to personal communication. Adjudicating involves not only stipulating which rules are going to apply to the game, but also making a determination on play similar to that of a referee, who must be ready to resolve unexpected situations as they occur, within the expectations the rules provide. Because the rules are complex and multi-varied, the DM is expected to have an excellent, working grasp of their existence and function, if not their exact wording; the DM must be able, on demand, to seek out and express for the players the exact wording of the rules when these apply.

Providing context for game play requires the DM to verbally describe what the players "see" within the constraints of a fictional world, often called the "setting." The players are expected to imagine themselves at a specific place, the details and constraints of which are explained effectively and thoroughly enough by the DM that the players can feel, not individually, but as a group, that they are "there," just the same way a reader can picture a described scene in a text. That all the members of the group are able to see themselves in the same place, in the same way, is a testament to the explanatory skill of the DM. The importance and relative game value of the DM's depiction is of enormous consequence to gameplay, and shall be explained progressively as we move forward.

This setting is not populated by the players alone, but by an unknown number of other existing beings, with whom the players interact, that the DM must likewise provide context for. Some of these beings shall speak to the players, some shall act against the players or on their behalf, some will give the players additional exposition about the setting that describes places where the players are not at presently, all with the intention of adding to the players store of knowledge about the setting, while creating instances of tension and conflict which the players must, through their own stated actions, manage. Some of these other beings will impose their will upon the player, presenting themselves as the aforementioned obstacles which the players must overcome.

When the players succeed in overcoming obstacles, they are rewarded. The amount of the reward, and the manner of it, is determined by the DM also. The purpose of the reward is not only to enrich the players, but to expand the options they can draw upon a game play continues. In effect, to add to the store of choices a player individually has when attempting to resolve conflicts, and the store of overall options for the collective players, or "party," has when resolving difficulties as a team.

Finally, because the games rules are perpetually insufficient for the complexity of situations and possibilities that the game setting allows, a good DM is one that takes the time to rewrite rules, with the confirmation and consent of the players, to provide logical and practical options and constraints for the players to experience and enjoy, while expanding the framework of the game they play. Often, this last choice of action is not pursued. The choice not to pursue it is not, in and of itself, evidence of a lacking DM, but failing to press the game further is limiting to the player's overall enjoyment in the long term.

Players

As stated, players are those participants who form a concept of what's been explained about the setting through the DM's description. The role of the player is to judge and interpret what's heard and then decide upon a course of action. Yet they cannot by the game's rules take any action that pleases them — they are limited in their choice by two factors: first, the constraints of physical reality, in the manner by which any human being is naturally checked — according to the familiar restrictions of time, ability to move and plausibly know things, as well as the need for air, water, food, shelter, sleep and clothing, within the natural threats to their health, resources, property and so on.

The other factor derives from the game itself as a list of boundaries and special benefits that accrue to players individually, dictated by a fabrication called the "character." The character is, essentially, the player's game piece. The details of the character, which are comprised of randomly rolled details complemented by personal choices made by the player within the game's rules, dictate which choices the player can undertake when playing the game. At this point, examples would be counter-beneficial — it is more important to understand how the player makes decisions about play based on what the "character" is, than it would be to introduce game terms that would have to be explained now, toward no good purpose. Rest assured that characters are not only initially complicated and requiring of player intuition, but that characters necessarily become more so as the game continues. This can be taken on faith until it is practical to explain it.

During play, the player listens to what the DM says before choosing an action. The player may wish to converse with other players before doing so. All the players are free to take their own actions within the limitations defined, either individually or conjointly. Often, especially in complex situations, players make a plan before any player takes an action. When an action is taken, the DM interprets the action, explains the effects of the action... and then players are free to take another action and so on.

This process goes on indefinitely. At any point the game can be suspended, the DM and players remembering or making notes about what they did last, so that the game can be set aside for any period of time that is convenient for the participants. When the game is reconvened, the last actions and the general situation are reviewed, then the process of the DM explaining the setting and the players reacting to that setting can continue. In this manner, over the course of week after week, a single game can literally continue for years at a time. This continuing game is commonly called a "campaign," but this is only a simplification of this concept in game terms, and we can revisit the word and its deeper definition later.

The Character

This describes the person-shaped puppet that is made to function by the player's will in game play — but before we can understand how this identity actually functions under the player, we must explain the character's structure. As a device, the character is made up of qualities that variously manifest in two forms: as constraints against the player's wishes and as "affordances" — an unfamiliar word that describes rules and structures that allow the player to attempt actions in a meaningful and potentially successful manner. Just as a door with a handle allows it to be pulled open, a game affordance allows the use of tools and abilities in order to afford benefits in game terms.

Attributes

We begin by establishing the character's physical and mental capacities. These are managed through six "attributes," which are also sometimes described as "ability stats" or even simply "stats." The multiplicity of terms indicates their importance in D&D. We should take a moment to remember that for our purposes, these attributes exist as game terms — over the years, all have accumulated cultural interpretations, but these must be directly set aside as they are irrelevant to understanding game play.

Four of these stats describe physical characteristics: strength, constitution, dexterity and charisma. Strength is best described as prowess, boldness or spirit, as well as being physically brawny or muscular. Constitution describes health and, loosely, endurance — though parts of the latter are better attributed to strength. Dexterity best describes agility or nimbleness; the word's relationship to craft, skill or common sense should be discounted in this context. Charisma describes attractiveness and magnetism; in context, it can relate to the loyalty engendered in others, but that should be treated as secondary to the attribute's direct meaning.

Two of these stats describe mental characteristics: intelligence and wisdom. Intelligence can be understood as comprehension and problem-solving. Wisdom, in turn, conveys sagacity, knowledge and good judgment. Because these terms refer to esoteric aspects, much time has been taken in rehashing or debating exactly which ability accounts for what kind of thinking process — what we must do, however, is remember that the specific meaning is less relevant than how it applies in-game, within the scope of constraints and affordances to which each pertains.

Attributes are determined by random generation. In AD&D, this is accomplished by rolling four six-sided dice (commonly shortened to "4d6") then discarding the lowest die — or one of the lowest dice — so that only three dice that have been rolled are counted and added together. The total produces a result between 3 to 18. In all, six totals are created, one for each of the six attributes we've described. The attributes are arranged in a column, typically in the upper left corner of a piece of paper, conveniently abbreviated thusly: Str, Int, Wis, Con, Dex, Chr. The player then assigns one total to each attribute, or ability stat, so that each has a number beside it that numbers range between 3 and 18.

The arrangement of the stats itself is a form of gameplay, as the player is faced with deciding which mode of existence the character is going to inhabit with the game setting. This "mode" can be seen as a profession, or a way of life; in AD&D, it is termed a "character class," carrying with it a specific and largely unique set of affordances that the "class" allows.

Note: Any ability stat below 7 will impose penalties to die rolls, comprehension or social status that may seriously threaten the survival of the character. If a very low ability stat is generated, where it is placed matters against the choices the player makes in how to "play," or puppet-master the character. Characters who wish to engage in fighting — as the game involves "combat" that's carried out against the character's enemies — should steer clear of adopting a low stat as their strength, constitution or dexterity. Those who wish to do a lot of speaking on behalf of their character, as a means of swaying the opinions of persons met within the setting, should not adopt a low charisma. Those who plan to use their character to read, problem solve or invent should not adopt a low mental stat, either wisdom or intelligence.

As a fixed rule, no stat generation that includes more than one result of 5 or less can be left stand; should this occur, the result should be discounted at once and the four dice rolled again.

Character Class

Once the stats are rolled, and before they are assigned, the player chooses the character class they wish to play. Each class permits affordances, or "special abilities," which the player is able to perform. Each class also imposes limitations upon the character with respect to self-defence, freedom of choice — even the fictional belief system the player is expected to embrace on behalf of the class. The classes range from those with a greater capacity to fight to those that are able to quite literally perform magic in the way of spells and also in distinct class-based talents. The enumeration of all skills related to all classes would be a ponderous, at this point unnecessary exercise; rest assured, all shall be explained when it becomes necessary to do so.

There are ten-character classes for the participants to choose from in original AD&D, describing the game as published before the year 1980. These are, listed alphabetically, assassin, cleric, druid, fighter, illusionist, magic-user, monk, paladin, ranger and thief. At this time, an overview of each must be given with respect to the placement of ability stats; later, additional details about each will be provided when that information becomes necessary for learning how different aspects of the game work. The original game books organise these classes in their entirety, so they may be viewed by players... but our goal is to teach the game, not provide material collections that can later be put into appendices, when all the rules regarding the character class, and any other part of D&D, are fully understood.

Generally speaking, for the character to receive direct affordances, or "benefits," from their ability stats, the stat must be above 14 and, in the case of strength, higher than 15. In such cases, the stat is described as "high." Exceptions are included depending upon the character class. All character classes presumptively dictate that minimum numbers must be assigned to specific attributes. This is explained below.

Assassins are professional murderers who are assumed to be unconcerned with malevolence; their skill set tends toward criminal or subversive activities. A high dexterity is desirable, as it improves the use of missile attacks; a minimum of 12 dexterity is required. Strength is also beneficial and must be at least 12; intelligence must be at least 11. Aside from these, a high constitution is of the most benefit. Wisdom is generally ill-considered for an assassin, as a player choice. Both constitution and wisdom must be 6 or higher. Charisma can be as low as 3, with the presumption that most assassins are unlikable.

Clerics are religious crusaders or leaders who are able to cast spells. The number of spells available to the cleric increases with wisdom — therefore the higher the wisdom, the better; but take note, the character must have a wisdom of 9 or greater. Because the cleric's spells tend to be defensive or non-combative in nature, clerics will often engage in hand-to-hand fighting, called "melee," which benefits from a high strength or constitution. Dexterity can also be a help, though clerics are limited in the use of missile weapons, which dexterity affects. Charisma is useful to a cleric should they decide to manage a church someday. All stats, with the exception of dexterity, must number 6 or more.

Druids are nature-based spellcasters who are perceived as being more concerned about flora and fauna than for traditional civilisation. Like clerics, their spells also increase with wisdom points; however, because the druid must have a minimum charisma of 15 and a wisdom of 12, choosing to be a druid without having at least two generated results above 14 would be a poor gaming choice for the player. Druids have greater restrictions upon their combat ability than clerics, but strength, constitution and dexterity can still afford benefits. Intelligence is often viewed as a "dump stat" of the class, a colloquial term meaning the place where the lowest generated number is placed. All attributes for a druid must be 6 or more.

Fighters are a combat-focused class with wide affordances in weapons and armour. They hit more easily, are harder to kill and act as protectors of the other weaker classes. The example of Liam above shows typical placement for the fighter: strength first, followed by constitution, with dexterity a typical third. Swapping dexterity for constitution is common. Distribution between charisma, intelligence and wisdom depends upon personal choice, with the exception that an attribute less than 6 must be placed as intelligence. Fighters need a minimum strength of 9, a constitution of 7 and all other attributes except for intelligence must be at least 6.

Illusionists are a focused spellcaster character class with spells balanced toward misdirection and the creation of illusion; they are weak in combat. Though by the rules the attribute has no effect upon their spellcasting, an illusionist must have a minimum intelligence of 15. The illusionist must also have a minimum dexterity of 16, which in turn is their most beneficial attribute. Because the character will largely avoid fights, wisdom and charisma are usually chosen, followed by strength; these three stats must all be at least 6. Constitution can be as low as 3.

Magic-users are likewise spellcasters, with spells that tend more toward the manipulation of elemental forces and matter. They are also weak in combat. Their minimum attribute requirements are far less, with the class needing a 9 intelligence and a minimum of 6 in all other attributes except strength, which can be as low as 3. However, the higher the intelligence that a mage has, the more versatile and effective they are as a class, so placing the highest possible generated number upon a would-be mage's intelligence is key to the class's success.

Monks resemble warriors of Eastern culture, with a distinct similarity to medieval Wuxia adventurers, more commonly recognised today as masters of kung fu and related martial arts. The requirements to become a monk are high: the player must generate three numbers which are 15 or higher, to be placed as the character's strength, wisdom and dexterity, and an 11 for the character's constitution. Charisma and intelligence must be a minimum of 6. These characters have unusual powers that some players may find worth the difficulty of achieving such a character.

Paladins are unusually powerful fighters possessing unique magical aspects while embodying the spirit of fictional medieval heroes such as Siegfried, Lancelot and Parsifal. They are restricted in their behaviour, as they must be true of heart and deed, else they risk tumbling to the status of mere fighters should they grievously sin. As a class, their attribute minimums are harsh: a 17 charisma, a 12 strength, an intelligence of 9, a wisdom of 13, a constitution of 9 and a dexterity of 6. Because they are fighters, a high strength and constitution greatly improve the paladin's chance of survival.

Rangers are unusually strong and resilient fighters who possess unusual skill when acting in wilderness environments, suggestive of Robin Hood or William Tell. They are more mildly restricted in their behaviour and are expected to be generous and kind; as a class, their attribute minimums are also difficult to achieve: a strength and intelligence of 13, and a wisdom and constitution of 14. Both dexterity and charisma must be at least 6.

Thieves are criminals with great skill in concealment, robbery and striking from behind; as a class, they benefit from not being seen, which balances their drawbacks as combatants, placing their fighting abilities above illusionists and magic-users, but weaker than everyone else. Thieves need only a minimum dexterity of 9, with a minimum of 6 in every other attribute except wisdom, which can be as low as 3.

There is a great deal more to be said about character classes and the options they open up for players, but for the moment those specifics are better set aside. Before narrowing the focus to class-based abilities, it is more useful to establish a clearer view of the player's character as a whole. To that end, attention can shift to other elements that apply to every character, apart from class. Addressing these shared details better allows a complete picture to emerge, so that when further details about class are provided, they may be understood more thoroughly.

Peoples

For those with no experience with AD&D, the discovery that their "races" and that players are expected to decide which they are without context, before moving on from here, can be off-putting. "Race" has become anachronistic in this day and age, though it is the game's language — therefore I feel it would be best to say that players at this stage of character creation are asked to choose, at this time, what "people" to which they'd like their characters to belong.

While it would be convenient to ignore the archaic toxicity of AD&D race-rules—the assumption that humans are "superior," the tiresome presupposition of antipathy between dwarves and elves—it would be irresponsible to do so. What fictional peoples think or believe in the game's setting are not "rules," they are the opinions of narrow-minded persons and we need not give them credence. We have already explained that a "rule" is boundary the players should observe, as something applied consistently and predictably by any DM, regardless of their background. Therefore, things in AD&D that attempt to describe what peoples choose beyond strict game details that provide defined affordances—or benefits, if one prefers, can be discarded. We need not give time to them nor credibility.

Different peoples exist in game to provide the nuance of not being human; those persons who, from a familiarity with fiction or film, might wish to become elves, dwarves and other such persons are invited to do so. Original AD&D provides six peoples other than humans, which of course remain an option for players: aside from elves and dwarves, there are gnomes and halflings, then two peoples of mixed ancestry, unpleasantly called "half-elf" and "half-orc." The names reflect the lack of 1970s imagination. It would make sense for these intersectional cultures to possess a name unto themselves, but alas, I must leave it to the individual setting-designer to choose what seems best for them. I'm trapped somewhat by the endless references in the rule books to these appellations, and so, for good or fair, I must use them.

No one people should be considered superior to others. The setting may appear to favour humans, but that is most likely because the designer is unfortunately of that people. We should expect a game setting created by an elf or a gnome to reflect the tendencies of such persons; and if the designer in reality relates better to elves, then this is the setting they shall design.

All peoples provide sufficient benefits or characteristics to assure their survival in the game — survival being the primary benefit of both character classes and peoples in a world where fighting, dangerous enemies, magic and other such unknowns exist. We have not yet delved into this aspect of the game, so I shall keep this brief: the value of affordances offered by classes and the people we choose to be affects how well the player can maintain their health and well-being against threats. That's enough to ground the choice we make for now; the matter will be investigated in depth when it is time to unpack actual game play.

To manage this threat, a group of players choosing a mix of classes and peoples is of great benefit. This increases the opportunities to promote survival across the whole group: just as the fighter, magic-user, cleric and thief classes support one another (among too many other combinations to count), an elf, a dwarf, a human and a halfling do likewise. Benefits accrue through virtuosity, more than ever at the outset of the game. Thus, it is well for a player deciding what class to be, or what people to be, ask others in the party what they're doing in kind.

Except for the human, not all peoples can be all classes. The argument for this is that because humans gain no special affordances for what they are, they're entitled to become any class they wish. Other peoples, however, gain extra benefits beyond their character class because of their background, which costs the player nothing except to freely make their character a different people than human. Whether this particular balancing is justified, or even, is not for this author to say in this context — but other approaches to this particular game rule do exist, outside AD&D.

To be able to choose which people to whom the player wants their character to belong, it is necessary to understand the benefit these peoples provide in some small measure. The combined number of benefits is widespread; patience is therefore requested. A complete and precise list of character peoples' affordances will be available in the appendix, so what details are given here are expressly for the purpose of making a choice, not for the purpose of adjudicating game play by the rules. Measurements are given in Imperial units because in a medieval world, metric does not exist.

Dwarves stand on average about 3 foot six to 4 feet in height and weigh 120 to 150 pounds; adopting a dwarf as a character increases that character's placed constitution by 1 point. Dwarves are able to become assassins, clerics, fighters and thieves. They receive bonuses in situations where magical attack against the character demands a saving throw, which is a game mechanic used when the character faces sudden danger, where the outcome alone decides whether that character either avoids or suffers the danger's effect. Dwarves have a similar resistance to poison or venom, which creatures, plants or enemies can employ to attack the character. Dwarves possess their own language, while being able to speak the language of numerous other peoples, enabling communication between the party and these others — which include humanoid groups not available as a choice for players in making a character. Dwarves have an unusual ability to see in the dark; they are miners of great skill; and as combatants, they are particularly effective against half-orcs, goblins, hobgoblins and orcs (to name three such peoples that "player characters" cannot be). Other humanoids that are enormous in stature and giant-like find it difficult to hit dwarves due to their fighting skill and size.

As an aside, there's no special reason why players can't choose goblins, hobgoblins or orcs, which are humanoid peoples of much uglier appearance than those peoples that are available, except that the rules state they are not. Within a typical setting, these other creatures are seen as unusually scary, with characteristics that are extremely off-putting, while the rules — gotten to in their own time — describe them as malevolent ("evil") and deeply resentful of civilisation-based ideals. This is usually the reason given for why they are not included as player options for play.

Elves stand on average about 4 foot six to 5 feet in height and weigh 80 to 100 pounds; adopting an elf as a character increases the character's dexterity by 1 point, while 1 point is removed from their constitution. Elves are able to become assassins, clerics, fighters, magic-users and thieves. They receive a bonus when using a sword or a bow, which are weapons employed in the game during combat. They have a very strong resistance against magic that puts them to sleep, or which attempts to charm them. Elves also have their own language and are able to speak the languages of many other peoples, more than dwarves; they have a special gift for language, so that those with a 16 or greater intelligence can learn additional tongues. Elves also possess an unusual ability to see in the dark; they have a gift for discovering concealed or secret doors, exactly of the sort that blend so perfectly they cannot be found by others. Elves are also able to move so silently when not wearing armour that they have a high chance to "surprise" others — a game mechanic that allows additional actions before the surprised person can respond. It's quite common to wear armour in the game to protect oneself, but it can be seen that occasionally, not wearing armour provides benefits also.

Gnomes are smaller than dwarves and are considered a cousin of the latter. They stand about 3 foot three to 3 foot six in height, weighing 75 to 80 pounds; adopting a gnome as a character offers no special adjustments to the character's attributes. Gnomes are able to become assassins, clerics, fighters, illusionists and thieves. They receive the same benefits against magic as their dwarvish cousins, with like adjustments to their saving throws, but do not enjoy the same benefit against poison and venom. Gnomes understand their own language and that of certain others and are able to communicate with burrowing animals such as moles, badgers and squirrels. They too possess an unusual ability to see in the dark. They are miners of exceptional merit and are effective in combat against the aforementioned goblins, and one other people called kobolds. Gnomes enjoy the same defensive benefit against very large giant-like creatures as well.

Half-elves stand on average about five foot two to five foot six in height and weigh between 100 and 130 pounds. Adopting a half-elf as a character offers no special adjustments to the character's attributes. They are able to become assassins, clerics, druids, fighters, magic-users, rangers and thieves, more than any other people except humans. They have some immunity from magic that causes sleep or which can charm the individual, but much less than that of elves. They understand the language of humans and elves, and a number of others besides. They retain the unusual ability to see in the dark from their elven forebears, and the same ability to spot or locate concealed or secret doors.

Halflings as a people are so named because the word "hobbit" was protected under copyright and trademark law, and could not be incorporated into any version of D&D. Nonetheless, the equivalent still holds. Halflings are smaller even than gnomes, standing but 2 foot nine to 3 feet tall, and weighing a mere 50 to 60 pounds. They are so slight that adopting a halfling as a character decreases the character's strength by 1 point, while 1 point is added to their dexterity like elves. They are able to become clerics, druids, fighters and thieves. They are hardy beings however, and so like dwarves they receive bonuses in situations where magical attack against the character demands a saving throw — and yes, this applies to poisons and venoms also. Halflings are able to speak their own language and a number of others besides. They possess a weakened ability to see in the dark and some understanding of the underground world, but not nearly so much as dwarves and gnomes.

Half-orcs describe a brutish, more limited people; they stand on average about 5 foot 2 to 5 foot 6 in height and weigh between 120 and 150 lb. They make good fighters, as adopting a half-orc adds 1 point to the character's strength and another point to the character's constitution. They are able to become assassins, clerics, fighters and thieves. They are able only to speak the language of humans and that of orcs, their forebears. They possess an unusual ability to see in the dark.

Humans stand on average between 5 foot 6 to 6 feet in height and weigh between 130 and 175 pounds. They receive no adjustments to their attributes nor any special knowledge or defences. They can become any class. They are able to speak only the human language. They cannot see well in the dark. Their greatest benefit aside from their class diversity is their size, as humans are both taller and heavier than the other peoples described here.

Further details about people and their backgrounds can be set aside for now, though we will return to the subject in greater detail, once the reader is more familiar with the game's larger structure.

Gender

Apart from choosing one's character class and biological heritage, players are also encouraged to decide their biological gender or sex, whichever seems to best describe the player's viewpoint. Desirably, we should wish that whatever the identification chosen, it should have possess no applicable rule exceptions or special benefits, since the game's purpose should not be to serve as this sort of battlefield. All that is asked is that a male player be permitted to play a female character, and that a female player should be permitted to play a male — and that is as far as this discussion needs to go. There is one unfortunate table that was included in pre-1980 AD&D that seeks to dictate that a woman's strength attribute is one or more points less than a man's, depending upon the people of origin, but this table easily can be and should be ignored in this day and age.

Hit Points

As a fabrication, the character is breakable; it can be killed. Situations can arise in game where the character can fall, be buried alive, be trampled by a runaway horse, drown... and, naturally, be killed by an enemy employing a weapon. To capture the character's fragility, not only do we need a measurement that compares the character to other beings in the setting, but also one that allows the player to identify the same character at their best and also at a state of near death. As this is a game, the best method of doing this is to assign a number that states the character's "full health" versus the character is a state of "near death." That number is described as the character's hit points.

When creating a character, the player also creates the character's hit points (abbreviated "h.p."). Playing strictly by the rules, the character is awarded a die type that corresponds to the class: a d10 (producing a number of 1-10) for fighters and paladins; a d8 for clerics and druids; two d8 for rangers; a d6 for assassins and thieves; two d4 for monks; and a d4 for illusionists and magic-users. This would mean that if the character were a druid, then an eight-sided die is cast, and the number shown is written down on the character as that character's hit points. The number represents the character's maximum hit points.

Though this is what the rules give the player, experience with the game teaches that this produces an obviously fragile first-level character. This introduces a conundrum for the participant, both DM and player, regarding the principle of "rules as written." Fifty years of game play has created a number of implicit practices or "house rules" that deliberately transcend rules that are obviously ill-conceived — such as the hit point rule so stated. Traditional convention, going back to about the beginning of the game, is to assume that the beginning player, who might roll the maximum upon the die (in the case of a druid, an "8") has, in fact, done so, without having to actually roll. The practice is not canonical; it is, however, extremely common, so the reader should not be surprised if the DM says, at this point in character creation, to assume that "maximum hit points" were rolled. Note that the DM is entitled to play by the rules as written — it really depends on what you as a DM might wish to do, or what the DM you are playing with chooses to count as policy.

There are many such implicit policies. We shall point them out as we encounter them.

Constitution Adjustments to Hit Points
Constitution	h.p. adj.
3	-2
4-6	-1
7-14	nil
15	-
16	+2
17	+2 (+3)
18	+2 (+4)

Because hit points draw the line between life and death, and because we have no other pressing issues upon us now, we can take the time to better understand how hit points are adjusted and what they mean to the game of D&D. The table shown indicates the hit point adjustment that constitution either subtracts or grants; a very low constitution, 3, subtracts 2 from the character's maximum h.p.; a constitution of 4 to 6 subtracts only 1. A constitution of 7 to 14 has no effect on h.p., while higher constitutions add 1 or 2, if we ignore the number in brackets.

Where it states in brackets "+3" for a 17 constitution, that benefit is for fighters, paladins and rangers only; grouped together, these are called the "fighter classes.' All other character classes gain +2. The same goes for an 18 "con" which grants +4 to the fighter class. Thus, it can be seen how important constitution is for fighters, and why, when placing the initial first six attributes that are rolled, constitution should always be a consideration. The more hit points a character has, the greater their chance at survival.

There is a rule that disallows a negative adjustment to hit points where the penalty on the table exists, for characters with a 6 constitution or less. Regardless of the penalty, therefore, if a result of less than 1 point is indicated by the adjustment, the player should record the total number of hit points as 1.

Elements of the game, especially a weapon or a form of magic in the hands of an enemy, can take away the character's hit points. When all the hit points are gone, or reduced to zero, the character is "dead." One option at this point is to begin at the beginning and roll another character, whereupon the player tries to do better in not dying. This is a large part of the game. Alternately, if the character is very precious, the other players, through their characters, can decide to "raise" or "resurrect" the character, which is a form of magic that brings the dead back to life. We will revisit this later, but let's just be clear for the present that this can be difficult and is often unavailable as an option. It is more likely that the player will need to roll a new character.

Because the possibility of death exists, it's best not to become too attached to a character until a reasonable expectation of "being raised" becomes credible in game. This is a common mistake for new players — but the character is not, and should not be, a puppy. It can be seen already that it's actually quite easy to get a new character started: roll attributes, sort them, choose a class, choose a race, choose a gender and roll hit points. This is all that's actually been done to get the player to this point. With practice, these steps can easily take less than five minutes.

Characters can accumulate more hit points than what they start with through the process of advancement. In AD&D, this is done by accumulating experience points in order to gain experience levels. We can discuss these in brief.

Experience in-game is gained through removing the hit points of others — in short, causing their death — and then taking their stuff. There are systems for determining how many experience points are gained for bringing about the end of both peoples and "monsters," which we may loosely define as anything very unlike people. These systems are in the hands of the DM, and the process can be understood in detail once we have a better idea of actual game play. When points are awarded, the player writes down the amount, adding further experience to that which has been previously gained. As experience mounts — with anywhere from a dozen points to thousands being gained at a time as the game progresses — thresholds are passed that enable the character to move from "1st level," which is where they start, to 2nd, 3rd, 4th and so on. Depending on the character class, the upper limit can reach into the twenties, though usually any character of 8th level or greater is considered quite powerful.

Progressing to a higher experience level, from 1st to 2nd say, permits the gaining of hit points; it also brings a new spell for a "spellcaster classes" (that is, clerics, druids, illusionists and magic-users). We have not yet discussed spells, but rest assured, we will get there as soon as that's practical. Theoretically, gaining a level increases the probability of survival — but this can be challenged in that often the character's party (that is, again, the combined characters of all the players) often end up opposing more dangerous opponents also. Character advancement against setting dangers is a constant issue of "balance," where desirably the party is kept on a knife edge where their hit points, no matter how high a level they achieve, are always disappearing faster than the players might want.

Hit points that are lost by a character can be regained through healing. This can be done through magic — some spells are designed to be "cast" upon the character, magically restoring lost hit points. Another method of healing is through "rest" — characters "take a break," telling the DM that they wish to be laid up for a while, letting a few days in the setting pass, while hit points restore themselves. There are also devices, potions and ointments that also heal lost hit points. It is enough to know at this time that such things exist. The number of hit points at a given experience level can only fluctuate between "maximum," the most a character can have due to their initial and subsequent hit point die rolls, and zero, where death occurs.

Character Age

AD&D presupposes that the player's character is a resident of the setting, with childhood memories, familiarity with place and customs, presumably a family, a place of birth and ties to those people who have influenced the character's life. This presumption is not well-managed by the written game however — few details, if any, are actually offered to the player about the character, unless the DM chooses to do it. That said, the one detail that AD&D does impose is the character's age in years. That is a roll that the DM makes, prior to informing the player.

The number generated begins with the assumption that different peoples live for varying lengths of time: while humans may live past a hundred, elves can live long past a thousand; gnomes until they are 700; dwarves past 400, half-elves until 300, halflings into the high 100s and as the shortest living group, half-orcs are very long-lived at 75.

Non-human Character Age Table
People	Cleric	Fighter	Magic-User	Thief
dwarf	250 +2d20	40 +5d4	—	75 +3d6
elf	500 +10d10	130 +5d6	150 +5d6	100 +5d6
gnome	300 +3d12	60 +5d4	100 +2d12	80 +5d4
half-elf	40 +2d4	22 +3d4	30 +2d8	22 +3d8
halfling	—	20 +3d4	—	40 +2d4
half-orc	20 +1d4	13 +1d4	—	20 +2d4

By the rules, for all but humans, the table shown provides the "starting age" of the character, meaning at the moment when they entered the DM's game. Though some non-humans are able to be druids, rangers, illusionists and assassins, the original rules did not think to include these classes on this table. In any case, gnomes cannot be magic users, so the number there can be used for gnome illusionists. Half-elves can use the clerical number for druids and the fighter number for rangers. Halflings can be druids but there is no number given to halflings for the cleric, so halfling druids can use the fighter number. All races can use the thief number for assassins.

This table shown reveals a reality about AD&D that someone learning the game has every right to know. All too often, the idea for a table far supersedes the value of the table actually provided. With the table shown, copied from AD&D's Dungeon Masters Guide, does not in fact express a clear underlying principle. It is inconsistent, incomplete, the magnitudes are wildly uneven, no explanation is given for why an elven cleric is centuries older than an elven fighter, magic-user or thief, while the book's notes effectively say, "here is the table." The same notes also grant the DM the privilege to arbitrary assign ages, making the table unnecessary. That said, though the authors did not explain that table, which is likely due in some degree to a lack of time, space and editorial attention.

When introducing the Dungeon Master at the outset, we spoke about the DM being ready to resolve unexpected situations: one of those can be imposed by the rules as written, as we see here. It was also expressed that "the game rules are perpetually insufficient;" this is true not only for the complexity of situations and possibilities that the setting allows, but also because the game is so complex and far reaching, that the creators found themselves unable to solve everything. Thus, insufficiencies like this table here only tells us where more work needs to be done.

Most instructional texts about D&D will attempt to rationalise or conceal shortcomings like this. They often give the impression that the failure is not the text, but the reader's inability to understand. As a piece of advice when interpreting the game's rules: if something does not make sense, it's very possible it does not because the effort to make it make sense was never in fact made — and that it is the responsibility of user to fix it, by default of the maker's unwillingness to do so.

Human Character Age Table
Character Class	Roll	Character Class	Roll
assassin	20 +1d4	magic-user	24 +2d8
cleric	18 +1d4	monk	21 +1d4
druid	18 +1d4	paladin	17 +1d4
fighter	15 +1d4	ranger	20 +1d4
illusionist	30 +1d6	thief	18 +1d4

Those the rules do not expressly state this, we may presume there must be some reason why the illusionist and magic-user are considerable older than the other classes. Likewise, we might imagine that for some reason, assassins, monks and rangers must be more mature than other persons. One logical supposition, and surely not the only one, is that there is more to learn in order to belong to these classes. The player can simply say, "my character is a magic-user," but the age as generated will make that character necessarily older than every other human character in the party, sometimes twice as old. Of course, we may ascribe this to the desire to make the party look like Gandalf surrounded by younger striplings... but in that case, the "Gandalf" magic-user character is hardly old enough to fit the pattern.

In game designer terms, we must believe that someone, for some reason, believed that age should differ by class. Someone believed spellcasting required more time. Someone believed some identities required maturity. Those impulses never became a system, but their inclusion alone can provide a clue for any dungeon master wishing to take the premise to the next level. This branch of thinking serves as a benefit throughout the game's rules — even if the work wasn't done, it could be done, by the right enterprising person willing to undertake the task.

Aging Adjustments

Age Category Table
People	Young Adult	Mature	Middle-aged	Old	Venerable
dwarf	35-50	51-150	151-250	251-350	351-450
elf	100-175	176-550	551-875	876-1200	1201-1600
gnome	50-90	91-300	301-450	451-600	601-750
half-elf	24-40	41-100	101-175	176-250	251-325
halfling	22-33	34-68	69-101	102-144	145-199
half-orc	12-15	16-30	31-45	46-60	61-80
human	14-20	21-40	41-60	61-90	91-120

To understand how age affects the character's state of physical and mental prowess, the lifespan of each available people is subdivided into five stages, as shown in the table. Each represents a broad period of the character's life; once the character's age is known, the player can compare that age with the table and learn at which stage the character is at.

As a Young Adult, the character has reached the peak of health, but has not yet reached the pinnacle of robustness. As such, young adults are boisterous and a bit foolish. This is to be expected from a group just starting out in life, in a time when teenagers were expected to commit themselves to an apprenticeship or even get married. Characters run by the player, of course, must do neither, as they walk a different path. This is true in every case, but it helps to know what people are doing and at what stage in life. Mature characters have gotten over their foolishness and have reached their physical peak; typically, they count themselves lucky if they own property and have a family, while a great many are "going it alone" to make a name for themselves in the world. Most characters tend to fit this ideal.

Middle-aged characters have seen a great deal and have become much wiser with regards to what things they're willing to do. They're not as strong nor as healthy as they once were, but most are well-established, recognised in the communities where they dwell and content to apply themselves to making a comfortable life rather than adventuring. Old characters have lost more of their strength and health, and are not as spry as they once were; yet they are unquestionable wiser now about a great many things. Venerable characters continue to run down with regards to their physique, but they're unquestionably wiser and in the case of many who have kept their faculties, they are sharper-minded than most everyone.

Age Adjustment Table
Age Category	Starting Character	Aging Character
young adult	-1 wis, +1 con	-1 wis, +1 con
mature	+1 str, +1 con	+1 str, +1 wis
middle aged	+1 int, +1 wis	-1 str, +1 int, +1 wis, -1 con
old	-1 str, +1 int, +2 wis, -1 con, -1 dex	-1 str, +1 wis, -1 con, -1 dex
venerable	-2 str, +2 int, +3 wis, -2 con, -2 dex	-1 str, +1 int, +1 wis, -1 con, -1 dex

This table separates two things that are happening that, in the original AD&D books, are confusingly compiled together. When a character is first created, the table shown tells what changes are made to that character's attribute scores. This takes place after adjustments described under "peoples." Suppose for example that we have a human illusionist at 32 years of age; this makes the character "mature." We look under the column for "starting character" and see that 1 point is then added to the character's constitution and 1 point to the character's strength. This is precisely what AD&D rulebook says, but in a very roundabout, confusing way.

Now, let's say it's 9 years later and our illusionist is turning 41, effectively becoming "middle aged." We look under the column for "aging character" and see that strength and constitution gained at a younger age are lost now, to be replaced with +1 intelligence and +1 wisdom. The earlier bonuses are in effect explicitly replaced by other benefits that have accrued with age. Then, as the character continues to get weaker and less healthy and even clumsier as they get older, yet still wiser. This is as it should be. Aging is not really a reward system, but a background process that is meant to act independently of player success or failure — and, in no small degree, it tends to "flesh out" a character as well. This gives the player a little more to think about, while tempting the player to begin to care about the character as more than a "playing piece." Which is always dangerous where the actual game is concerned.

Appearance

By the game rules, all that is acknowledged is that the character has an appearance — but there are no precise rules that dictate what this is. Charisma suggests by virtue of the attribute's number that characters look beautiful (high charisma, 15-18 pts.), attractive (11-14 pts.), ordinary (8-10 pts.), plain (6-7 pts.) or ugly (3-5 pts.). This isn't meant to be a value judgment upon the character, merely an outward expression the construct might encounter from others at first glance. A low charisma might reflect a scar, an off-colouring, premature loss of hair and so on; a high charisma might reflect unusual bone structure, fine and luxurious hair, a classic jaw... but whether or not charisma is used at all by the players to define what their character looks like, the equation of charisma to attractiveness is not a rule. It is merely a potential shorthand. As such, players are often free to draw themselves as they'd like themselves to be, or otherwise generate pictures, usually with an understanding that the DM will accept the player's right to self-depiction.

The Fighter

Having established the basic structure of the whole character, our best approach would be to now go back and look at the individual character classes one at a time, to better understand how these shape and motivate the player's approach to the game. As such, we can cease describing a sort of universal character now and just discuss characters that are fighters.

The fighter represents the most direct approach to the game: hand-to-hand combat with opponents while using the physical body and its superior hit points as a shield. As a character class, the fighter is most efficient when the player embraces the strength-constitution-dexterity dynamic, foregoing an impulse to impose charisma over effectiveness, as some players do in anticipation that they want to "be liked" by residents of the game setting. In game, the fighter exists to solve a specific problem: the presence of a combative threat that must be put down before it puts down the whole party. If the player embraces the class as a solution to this threat, letting other characters do the talking, then survival for everyone in the party is far more likely to be the consequence.

Weapons

The notion of weapons in AD&D is, for some, an invitation for granularity or taxonomic enthusiasm, and indeed mechanical differentiation, which in fact is not reflected by the weapon's application with the game's combat system. Briefly, to address that last, a system of die rolls exists for the purpose of resolving combat when it occurs — primarily, these die rolls determine when hit points are taken or lost by the combatants. We need not delve into this system at this time, except to say that the weapon in the hands of the player's character has effect upon how that combat system works.

Fighters are the best combatants, with an unrestricted choice on which weapons they might wish to use. This same choice is available for the paladin and the ranger as well, who the reader should remember are also counted as "fighter classes." But before the choice can be made, let us provide an overview of the weapons that exist.

At the level the fighter operates, there are only a few questions that matter: how does the weapon cause damage (that is, the removal of an enemy's hit points) by cutting, bashing or thrusting? And how much damage does the weapon do? Does the weapon require one hand or two? How long is the weapon? How fast is it? How near must I be to the enemy to use it? Everything else is mostly descriptive excess.

Damage

The removal of an enemy's hit points occurs when the weapon "hits" the opponent. The determination of whether this hit occurs or not is determined by the aforementioned combat system. The amount of hit points removed is determined by a die throw — and as stated before, the available dice in the game are the four-sided (d4), six-sided (d6), eight-sided (d8), ten-sided (d10), twelve-sided (d12) and the twenty-sided (d20). The last we can discard here because it is not used for character-caused weapon damage. The d12 is used rarely. This leaves four dice — the d4, d6, d8 and d10 — with which to generate damage from more than 30 weapon types. This seems improbable.

The spread of possibility is resolved cleverly. A d6 can also double as a "d3," producing a spread of 1-3. A d4 produces a spread of 1-4, but by adding a point to the roll, we can also create a spread of 2-5. Two d4 (expressed as "2d4") added together produces a spread of 2-8. A d6 produces 1-6 and with an extra point, 2-7. And a d8 produces the spread of 1-8. Surprisingly, "2-9" is not used. The d10 produces a spread of 1-10. Thus, we have, in order:

1-3, 1-4, 2-5, 1-6, 2-7, 1-8, 2-8, 1-10.

It's in this format that weapon damage is usually expressed. It isn't wrong to say that a weapon does d6+1 damage, but it's more correct to say it does 2-7 (pronounced as "two to seven"). Therefore, though more than one specific weapon might cause 1-6 damage, further differences can be imposed on that weapon by its purpose, number of hands, length, weight, speed and whether or not it can be thrown or fired at an enemy, at a distance. We can then group weapons into categories.

Primary Edged Weapons

This category describes agile weapons that are at the outside only six feet long, so that the fighter must get up close and personal with the enemy. The list of weapons in this category, with the damage they cause, is as follows: bardiche (2-8), battle axe (1-8), dagger (1-4), hammer (2-5), hand axe (1-6), military pick (2-7), scimitar (1-8), bastard sword (2-8), broad sword (2-8), long sword (1-8), short sword (1-6), two-handed sword (1-10). The reader should take note: some of the details given below do not come from the source material of AD&D, but from actual knowledge about these weapons, which did exist and were used. There is much poor scholarship that mixes up and mislabels these weapons, but diligent research can reveal much more about all of them, both in this category and in others.

Before clarifying the main of these weapons, a note is needed here about the "hammer," more commonly called a "war hammer" in the era that these weapons are meant to portray. AD&D professes in its rules that the hammer is a weapon that is used to bash an opponent, but this is only half true. While the hammer did incorporate a club-like head, the weapon was also composed, like a carpenter's hammer, of a bladed spike that very much did not function in the manner of "bashing" one's opponents. This matters because one of the aforementioned character classes, the cleric, is prohibited from using bladed or stabbing weapons. Therefore, while the creators of AD&D counted the hammer as a weapon a cleric could use, reality dictates it to be well within those weapons that are prohibited. The reader can decide to accept the hammer as an exception to the stabbing rule, allowing the cleric to use it, but by definition, the designers did not understand the weapon they included on their lists. No doubt, the designers were thinking of the Hollywood double-faced hammer: two symmetrical blocks of metal on a haft, swung like a club. That object is largely fictional. As a real weapon it would be impractically heavy, poorly balanced, slow to recover, and inferior to both maces and axes at doing the work it is supposed to do. No serious fighting tradition adopted it because it solves no problem efficiently.

Using AD&D's numbers, the dagger is a 15-inch knife weighing 1 pound. The hammer as listed is 5 pounds but inexplicably only 18 inches long; no such weapon ever existed and certainly wouldn't be effective as a weapon in close quarters; the actual weapon is closer to 30 inches. The short sword and hand axe do the same damage; both can be used one-handedly. The hand axe can be thrown, making it a missile weapon, which we shall address soon; the short sword cannot. As listed, the hand axe is heavier (5 lb.) than the short sword (3½ lb.), which makes the latter preferable in hand-to-hand, as it's lighter, while the hand axe's hurling option counterbalances its weight.

A military pick is one-handed and similar to a warhammer — and often mistaken for one — but the "hammer" part is replaced by a narrow, flattened blade that arcs from the top of the handle, counterbalanced by a spike. The battle axe, scimitar and long sword all cause 1-8 damage, but the battle axe needs two hands differentiating it from the others. The scimitar benefits over the sword in that the curved blade makes it easier to use from horseback, as it prevents hacking into the horse's neck. For a foot soldier, the long sword has a better reach (six inches longer than the scimitar), though it weighs more. "Reach" is not accounted for in AD&D's combat system, however.

The bardiche, bastard sword and broad sword all cause the same damage, but the bardiche, similar to the battle axe, also requires two hands. The bastard sword is odd in that it can be used two-handedly, whereupon it causes 2-8 damage, but it can also be used one-handedly (whereupon the damage is reduced to 1-8). The broad sword is the only edged weapon that can be used one-handedly and cause 2-8. It weighs less than the bastard sword (7½ vs. 10 lb.) and is shorter (3½ vs. 4½ ft. long). This only leaves the two-handed sword, weighing 25 lb. and 6 ft. long by the rules, as the only weapon that causes 1-10 damage.

As a last point, AD&D's rules state that the hammer can also be thrown, like the hand axe. The individual DM can decide, but here the throwing option remains unchanged.

Bludgeoning Weapons

This category describes brute-force weapons designed to smash an enemy, intending to harm by breaking the enemy's body rather than opening wounds. The list of weapons includes the club (1-6), flail (2-7), mace (2-7) and morning star (2-8).

The club comes in a great many forms, known as a shillelagh, knop, cudgel and other names. It can be cut from the sizable branch of a hardwood tree, charred to make it harder, then lacquered to make it resistant to splintering and wear from impact. Clubs are light, about 3 lb. Historically, the flail — a chain-linked spiked ball used freely in melee — is poorly attributed to function as a battlefield weapon, something AD&D ignores. In the game, the spiked weapon weighs 15 lb. In reality, the "flail" was derived from a tool used for threshing grain, and more closely shaped like the Chinese nan-chuks, was used for striking corpses to ensure death or to disable armoured bodies so they could be stripped of equipment.

The mace does the same damage as the flail, and is a nimbler weapon at 10 lb. Moreover, unlike the flail, it is used one-handedly. It is shaped like a club with a solid head that is flanged or knobbed. The image many have of a large ball on the end actually describes the morning star; often, this latter is portrayed like a flail, with a chain, but no, the morning star was a single rigid structure with spikes concentrated at the point of impact. In AD&D, it weighs 12½ lb. and needs two hands.

Staves

These consist of a strait length of hardwood, shaped for use as a striking weapon. It is wielded with two hands. The list of staves includes the bo stick, jo stick and quarterstaff; all do 1-6 damage.

The bo stick, or bō, originates from Okinawan and Japanese tradition; AD&D lists its length as 5 ft. but six is more common. Techniques in bōjutsu for using it involve sliding the hands, changing grip continuously, striking with either end, blocking, trapping, sweeping, thrusting and using the shaft to control space. The jo stick, or jō, also originates in Japan, associated with the tradition of jōdō; AD&D identifies it as 3 ft. long but four is more common. In use, the jō is designed to intercept and redirect attacks, exploit openings, and apply leverage, with both ends used interchangeably while sliding the hands along the shaft to change reach mid-action.

A quarterstaff is 6 to 8 ft. long and is more familiar in Western literature. It is made from tough hardwood and combines offense and defence seamlessly. It strikes with either end, thrusts, blocks, traps weapons, sweeps legs, and applies leverage to unbalance or control an opponent. The benefit of all these weapons is that the weapon can be made at no cost with minimum tools and skill; a length of hardwood, cut, shaped, hardened and smoothed, is sufficient, requiring no metalworking, forging or special components.

Thrusting Weapons

These are designed to injure by concentrating force upon a narrow point that is driven forward and into the target. They also require two hands. The list of thrusting weapon includes the spear (1-6), the trident (2-8) and the lance, which does variable damage dependent on the size of the horse. The lance must be used from a mount, and therefore is very different from the other two.

The spear is a long wooden shaft between 6 to 8 ft. long, with a pointed metal tip, usually of iron or bronze; the tip may be made of other hard materials including ivory or obsidian. The tip can even be simply of wood that has been charred for toughening and sharpened. The spear can be thrown as well as used in hand-to-hand, and it is inexpensive to fashion; the tip can be salvaged if the shaft is broken, so the weapon is very common among soldiery, who can be thus equipped cheaply.

The trident consists of a pointed head fixed to a shaft, can also be thrown and due to its multi-pronged attack, is more dangerous than the spear. The lance is designed for a single hit made while charging. The opponent, when struck, suffers a greater damage from the weapon, which is then discarded. It cannot be used effectively as a weapon outside of a charge, so that once used, it is discarded on the field to be collected later. It is made of wood and is rarely tipped with metal. On a light horse, it does 1-6, which is doubled; upon a medium horse, 2-7, and on a heavy horse, 3-9 (2d4+1).

Polearms

These are weapons consisting of a striking or thrusting head mounted on the end of a long shaft, designed to extend the user's reach and apply force at a distance greater than arm's length. Depending on the head, a polearm may thrust, cut, hook, crush, or combine several of these functions at once. AD&D chose to include an excessive number of marginal variants, vastly overestimating the useful play value of these weapons. The list, organised by the damage they cause, includes the awl pike, fauchard, glaive and partisan (all 1-6); the spetum (2-7); the bec de corbin, fauchard-fork and military fork (all 1-8); the bill-guisarme, glaive-guisarme, guisarme-voulge, Lucern hammer, ranseur and voulge (all 2-8) and the halberd (1-10). In reality, these damage numbers are not derived from any demonstrable hierarchy of effectiveness among the weapons; they are arbitrary assignments applied to a historical profusion of forms that arose precisely because no single design proved decisively superior. The halberd's placement at the top of the scale, for example, reflects its iconic status rather than any consistent, universal superiority in combat.

The length of these weapons ranges from 8 to 10 ft. for most examples, to as long as 18 ft. for the awl pike, which in fact was only of use in mass formations and never as a single-person weapon. Beyond 10 ft., leverage and inertia becomes impractical, unless the weapon is designed to be held still and not moved, as was the tactic with scores of awls used together, presenting a structure that could not be charged against. Within AD&D's combat system, polearms are not given any distinctive mechanical treatment that reflects their historical purpose — since reach is assigned no value, their inclusion at all is frankly baffling, except as an attachment to medieval nomenclature for its own sake, preserving the appearance of historical specificity without integrating that specificity into the rules.

Missile Weapons

We have mentioned that some hand-to-hand weapons can also be thrown — the hand axe, hammer, spear and trident. To that we should add the dagger and, according to AD&D, the club also. This category includes those weapons that are primarily thrown or fired. Thrown weapons include the dart (1-3) and the javelin (1-6); fired weapons include the bow (1-6), the light crossbow (1-4), the heavy crossbow (2-5), and the sling (1-4).

The dart is a hand-thrown shaft weighing about 8 oz., weighted forward and tipped with a metal point; it is fletched. It corresponds most closely to plumbata used in antiquity and late Roman warfare, which had become obsolete by the time of D&D's professed era. No reference in the rules is made regarding it's use as a hand-to-hand weapon; imaginably, it could be used as one, but not well. This is something the DM might allow or not.

Javelins are optimised for throwing; they are light, thin, more forward balanced than a spear, with a shaft designed to flex under the stress of a throw. Historically, javelins were not intended to be retained after impact; many were designed to bend on striking so they could not be thrown back. They cannot be used as a hand-to-hand weapon.

Bows are either "long" or "short"; each is treated as a single stave of wood, shaped so that the bow’s elasticity comes entirely from the natural properties of that material. "Composite" bows exist, built from multiple materials laminated together, but these do not adjust the damage caused by an arrow, which is 1-6 for all bows. The difference long, short, long composite and short composite bows is all a matter of range only — range, and rate of fire for all missile weapons, will be managed within the combat system when that is explained.

Light and heavy crossbows differ in the sort of quarrel, or bolt, used; they have a different rate of fire, and as shown above, the heavy crossbow does more damage. Because of the time needed to load the weapon, and the lesser damage done, they are not a competitor in game for the bow. No special rules exist about how long a crossbow can be loaded before it is fired; crossbows of the time period could be "cocked" before release by a trigger, so that it could be kept in a loaded state for a time, unlike a bow that cannot be kept drawn — this was an important advantage of crossbows over bows, but this advantage is not discussed or afforded in AD&D.

Slings are loaded by placing a stone into the sling's pouch; one cord of the sling is looped around a finger. Following a controlled rotation of the sling, the slinger releases the free cord, opening the pouch and sending the projectile forward. While "space required" is given for other weapons in AD&D, to be discussed along with combat, no reference of this kind is given to missile weapons at all. The effective diameter of the circle created by the rotation of the sling is 4½ to 5 ft., making it quite impractical as an indoor weapon — but AD&D does not discuss or address this matter in any way. The damage above (1-4) assumes a thrown stone. If a "bullet" is used, a cast of lead in the shape of an almond, the damage done is 2-5.

Damage vs. "Size L"

In AD&D, size is rated in three sizes: "S" for small, which can be loosely as less than 5 ft. tall (and presumably less than 5 ft. long) without a weight measure provided in the game's rules. "M" stands for "man-sized," not medium, and includes creatures 5 to 7 ft. tall. "L" for large is only defined as larger than man-sized.

The weapons table in AD&D includes a column for the amount of damage that weapons cause when attacking L-sized creatures. No explanation for this is provide, nor any definition for how this value was derived, nor any procedure for applying it beyond the implication that larger opponents should, in some circumstances, be affected differently by certain weapons. As presented, the column cannot be extended, reasoned about or new weapons added without the number designated being wholly arbitrary. Reprinting the table here would imply that the column has explanatory or instructional value, when in fact it has none. This note is only included to acknowledge the existence of the column, while stating that no detail can be provided about it except to say it is indeed there. From experience and having once employed the column for some years of play, it is my opinion that the rule actively detracts from game play.

Proficiencies

While the fighter can employ every weapon in the foregoing outline, it is presumed that the individual must choose a limited number from this list of weapons they are expressly familiar with. These are described as the fighter's "initial weapons." When creating the character, the player is then directed to choose four initial weapons in which they are proficient. The choice can meaningfully affect the fighter's effectiveness when engaged in combat — and as such, with so many weapons to choose from, it's common for players to freeze at this point, trying to make up their minds about which they ought to choose.

The best approach is to employ the categories above. Begin by choosing first an everyday bladed or bludgeoning weapon — a sword or a mace is a good first pick, because they do good damage and they each only need one hand. This allows the character to employ a shield, which marginally helps defend the character's hit points; we'll be discussing shields and other armour in the next section following this. If the shield isn't important, consider a bardiche, battle axe, two-handed sword or morning star as your "primary" weapon. These cause a little more damage than other weapons or, in the case of a battle axe, they tend to be cheaper to buy.

Your second weapon should reflect the first. If you took a one-handed weapon, consider a hand-axe, warhammer or a dagger that you can hang on your belt. This can be used as a melee weapon if your main weapon breaks (yes, weapons can break), while these specific weapons can also be thrown at an enemy that is too far away to swing at. If you took a two-handed weapon, consider the spear, which you can carry in your hand while your main weapon is sheathed, and which you can throw at the outset of a fight before pulling your main weapon. Spears require two hands too, and have other benefits that will be explained later under the combat system.

Your third weapon ought to be something that you fire: a bow, a crossbow or a sling. Or you can carry three javelins or a number of darts, depending on the campaign's idiosyncrasies. This allows you to hit things at a distance, so that if you're fighting on the run, you're not helpless, while you have something to do while watching a lot of the enemy come on as they close in to fight you. It's just common sense that you ought to be able to hit something at a distance. Remember, a sling can use any stone found on the ground; that's much cheaper and more reliable than having to buy arrows or quarrels (and count them as they dwindle).

If you've chosen these three weapons, then you're already well-rounded as a fighter. Your fourth weapon might be a dagger if you haven't chosen it, because they don't weigh much and they can always be lent to someone else — plus, they're awfully common in the game world. A stave of some kind is a good choice, because you can make one out of nothing so that if you ever find yourself robbed or having broken out of a prison, you won't be unarmed for long. Plus, there are some creatures that are quite resistant to edged weapons, so taking a bludgeoning weapon or a stave can be really useful there.

If your DM employs a rule about the reach of a weapon, do consider a polearm. Being able to strike an opponent at a distance, who cannot strike you back, is really a benefit — it's why polearms exist.

There's a little more to discuss about proficiencies, but as it has to do with modifiers and mechanics, let's leave it off for a bit to talk about armour, before enhancing what we know about strength and "attack modifiers."

Armour & Armour Class

Armour is what a fighter wears as they expect to be attacked, and they intend to survive it. It provides outer shell that deflects weapon blows and conserves hit points. It doesn't make a fighter untouchable, only harder to touch; and how much armour the fighter wears balances things like movement or how much physical weight it carried.

But before we can discuss the details of armour, we first need to understand "armour class," which is an important part of the combat system. And that requires a brief discussion of what it means "to hit" something. Please take note: the words "to hit" are a game phrase, one of the most important in D&D.

Before we can remove the hit points from an opponent with the damage caused by our weapon, we need to hit that opponent successfully. This is done with the unfamiliar-looking 20-sided die. When attacking an opponent, due to a wide number of possible circumstances detailed in the combat system, the number on the rolled die must equal or be greater than the number needed to hit — a number that is, in large part, affected by the armour the defender has.

In AD&D, the least effective armour class counts as "AC 10", AC for "armour class." This is the equivalent of wearing ordinary clothing into a fight and nothing else. As better forms of armour are employed, armour class as a number is reduced. Thus, AC 9 is a better armour class than AC 10. This is confusing for many new players, who intrinsically feel that if armour is "added," the number ought to be higher. The insistence that it should be higher became so widespread that later systems of the game chose to reverse the rule — which did not make it better, or clearer, it only seemed to assuage those who's viewpoint of things disallows that any number which is smaller can be better.

As such, the reader is not asked to like descending AC, only to understand the manner in which the rule works. We might think of AC 10 as the amount of vulnerability we have, and that armour reduces that vulnerability. If your character carries a shield, that benefits your armour class by 1 point; it also reduces your vulnerability by 1 point. Therefore, you in ordinary clothing and carrying a shield have an AC of 9.

As a 1st level fighter, in order "to hit" AC 10, you must roll a 10 or higher on the die. If you succeed, you then roll the amount of damage the weapon that you're using causes, and that number is then subtracted from the enemy's hit points. Clearly, the better you are at hitting the enemy, the more likely it is that you'll cause damage; and the better protected the enemy is, the less likely you'll hit them, and the less likely it is that you'll do damage.

Therefore, any benefit you have that enables you "to hit" better is of great advantage to you; and anything you can wear or have that reduces your enemy's chance of hitting you greatly improves your ability to survive a fight. Much of AD&D is about the balance of these things — and from the outset of the game, when making your fighter character, the best and easiest way you have of improving your chances of surviving an attack is to obtain armour for yourself.

Proficiency Penalty

The advantage of "initial weapons" that the character chooses, as just previously described, is that there is not "proficiency penalty" attached to them. The fighter class can employ any weapon, whether proficient or no, but if the weapon is not one of those chosen, then a -2 "modifier" is attached to the die roll "to hit." This would mean that if the character needed a 10 or better on the d20 to hit, and rolled a 10, they would then subtract 2 points for using a non-proficient weapon; this would transform the 10 into an 8, which would "miss" the opponent. Thus, it matters a great deal what weapon we choose to be proficient in.

Armour Types

Armour in AD&D is made from a small number of familiar materials — cloth, leather and metal — fabricated into different forms that cover the body. Historically, other materials were used, including reed, rattan, hemp, bark, wood and even tortoise shell, but these are not accounted for in AD&D. Each offers a degree of protection at the cost of weight that the character must carry. At its simplest, armour relies on padding to absorb blows, hardened leather to resist cuts, or metal to deflect and distribute force, with the most effective suits combining more than one element. Protection is primarily achieved through craft, layering and coverage. The armour described hereafter bears some similarity to historical protection, but the descriptions and nomenclature should be understood only in AD&D game terms. Some of the names may be recognisable, but the manner of their construction described by the system should not be confused with literal historical designs.

Armour Benefits Table
Armour Type	Benefit	AC after adjustment
no armour	0	10
shield (any type)	1	9
padded armour	2	8
leather armour	2	8
studded leather	3	7
ring mail	3	7
scale mail	4	6
chain mail	5	5
banded mail	6	4
splint mail	6	4
plate mail	7	3
plate armour	8	2

Shields are presented as a shaped wooden construction that may be round or kite-shaped, covered with leather and bordered with soft iron banding that is presumably hammered around the edges. The manner in which the shield is carried is not explained; this allows the presumption in AD&D that the equipment can be dropped at will. There is no existing rule that denies this. Shields are divided into three types: the first is the large shield, which can be used to defend against up to three attackers at a time; then, the small shield — which is also mistakenly called at elsewhere in the rulebooks as a "normal-sized" shield — which can defend against two attackers, and the small wooden shield which can be used to defend against only one attacker. All provide the benefit of 1 point to armour class that is shown on the table, and the subsequent result of creating a "9 AC."

Padded armour is a heavily quilted coat described in AD&D as employing a leather jerkin and leggings. Historically, it was solely a textile armour, with layers of stuffed and quilted cloth, sometimes with felt or tow, built to absorb and spread impact and to resist cuts by making the blade bite into depth rather than flesh. Leather can show up as reinforcement at edges, as straps, as patches at wear points, but the AD&D depiction is quite in error here. Because the armour can be used with a shield, "padded & shield" would give an AC of 7.

Leather armour is fashioned of "cuir bouilli," where leather is boiled and traditionally macerated until rendered soft, so that it may be moulded, stamped and then worked into hardened pieces that are bound together to ensure a snug and tailored fit. AD&D describes the armour as cuirass and shoulder pieces, a softer shirt and leggings, but it tended to be more complex than this. It provides the same degree of protection as padded armour and so "leather & shield" also provides AC 7.

Studded leather is described in AD&D as metal studs that have been fastened to leather armour to provide additional protection, with an addendum that these studs are close-set and in effect form "small plates." It is largely a fantasy invention with no historical basis; it may have been a misunderstanding of "brigandine," which is torso armour made of overlapping metal plates riveted to the inside of a cloth or leather garment, which shows rivet heads that are visible on the outside. Studded leather improves armour class by 3 pts., giving an AC of 7; "studded leather & shield" is AC 6.

Ring mail is described as a long coat of leather into which is sewn metal rings; it bears some similarity to post-Mongol armours that appeared for a brief period in central Asia, but ring mail isn't a standard historical armour type either. Like studded leather, ring also improves AC by 3 pts., providing the same benefits.

Scale mail is described as possessing overlapping scales of metal that are sewn, like ring mail, into a long leather coat, and leggings also. The weight, the original material says, falls mainly upon the wearer's shoulders and waist. Historically, scale armour (mail describes interlinking) is a field of small overlapping metal plates fixed to a backing, and the backing is often cloth, sometimes leather, sometimes a mix, rather than a coat. Scale shows up in many cuts and assemblies, with the game's design being a simplified costume rather than a reliable construction. Scale mail, however, in the game improves armour class by 4 pts., giving an AC of 6; "scale & shield" is AC 5.

Chain mail is described as padding supported by interlocking mesh armour covering the upper and lower body, where vulnerable areas have multiple thicknesses. The combat system does not permit taking advantage of these areas, so this is merely flavour text, which applies largely to the armour descriptions given; weight also falls on the shoulders and waist of the wearer. Chain as described actually exists, though of course it is more complex than this. The armour worn by itself provides an AC of 5; "chain & shield" offers AC 4.

Banded mail is described as layered armour with padding, light chain and a series of overlapping bands of armour in vulnerable areas. Historically, it seems to refer to segmented methods, specifically laminar, which is made from horizontal bands of solid material, usually metal, laced and fastened together in overlapping rows to form a flexible shell. Worn by itself, banded gives the wearer an AC of 4; "banded & shield" equals AC 3.

Splint mail is described as light chain, greaves and a leather coat into which are laminated vertical pieces of plate with shoulder guards. The description is gently misleading — historically, "splinted" describes long narrow strips of metal ("splints") attached to a textile or leather backing, often on limbs, and sometimes as a torso defence. AD&D's description is a simplified hybrid, but the idea is real. Like banded mail, studded also improves AC by 6 pts., providing the same benefits.

Plate mail is described as light chain with pieces of plate — the cuirass (covering the torso and chest), shoulder pieces, elbow and knee guards, and greaves. Weight is well distributed. This describes a transitional form of plate-and-mail armour that existed from the late 13th and throughout the 14th century, but the reinforcements used were not standard and might describe any mix of metal plating assembled over the body. This improves armour class by 7 pts, giving the wearer AC 3. "Plate & shield," as it's commonly described, gives an AC of 2.

Plate armour also described by AD&D as "field plate," is distinguished from plate mail in that it is a full body suit constructed of metal pieces, much like the standard imagined knight wears in films like a Knight's Tale or Excalibur. The armour does not include the helmet, which is defined as such and counted separately. The latter term confirms that this is armour intended for use "in the field," as opposed to specialised tournament jousting. The armour improves armour class by 8 and provides AC 2; "Plate armour & shield" gives AC 1.

Inexplicably, we're provided three examples where two different kinds of armour provides the same benefit. No effort is made in AD&D to distinguish any form of benefit of one over another, except — and this will be addressed later when discussing how much weight the character can carry — in terms of their raw bulk. This would seem to suggest that one would always be chosen over the other, all other effects being equal... which in turn produces the question, why include both padded and leather armour, or both studded leather and ring mail, or both banded and splint mail? No reason is actually given for this, and it appears to be an oversight of some kind. In a given setting, the DM may arbitrarily decide that only one kind of armour is culturally available in a given region, thus compelling the character to wear something heavier when in that part of the world — but that hardly seems worth the repetition here.

Helmets

The combat system as designed gives little reason for the inclusion of the helmet as a separate article, as it does not contribute to the character's armour class benefit. However, the freedom to wear full armour without a helmet creates a system issue — it begs the argument that players must have helmets, though no direct mechanic exists to justify their presence. In response, AD&D does attempt to provide a mechanic, but it is a poor one.

If the character wears a helmet, the rule argues, then no extra die need be rolled when attacking the player. But, if the player does not choose to wear a helmet, then it is assumed that 50% of all attacks (1 in 2) should be addressed against the defender's head, which is therefore counted as AC 10. This requires, then, that before the "to hit" roll is made against non-helmeted opponent, a d6 must be rolled first, with a 1-3 on the die indicating that the attack is at the head and not the armoured body.

Further, if the character wears a "great helm," which is a much heavier metal helmet that protects the head in great degree, again the d6 must be rolled to determine if a "head attack" occurs, in which case the defendant protected by the great helm is counted as AC 1, regardless of their body's armour class.

This additional roll is inconvenient and in game play, almost universally ignored. Many who have played AD&D for years have likely forgotten the rule, or are unaware of it. Yet it does exist. Because the rule is ignored, for that reason no useful meaning to the helmet exists in AD&D.

Dexterity Effects on AC

One very important means of reducing the chance of an enemy to hit the character is to assign one of the initially rolled attribute numbers for a character that is greater than 14 to one's dexterity. This is not the best place, however, to describe this rule now, because dexterity accounts for other benefits also that are best addressed under the Thief character, hereto come after this discussion of the fighter classes. Therefore we shall simply say that a 15 dexterity provides a 1 point benefit which lowers the character's armour class by 1, with a 16 dex also providing +2, a 17 dex +3, and an 18 dex +4 to the armour class benefit.

Strength

Strength	To Hit Bonus	Damage Bonus
3	-3	-1
4	-2	-1
5	-1	nil
6-15	nil	nil
16	nil	+1
17	+1	+1
18	+1	+2
18/(01-50)	+1	+3
18/(51-75)	+2	+3
18/(76-90)	+2	+4
18/(91-99)	+2	+5
18/00	+3	+6

What we see on the right hand table are the benefits that fighters — and where the number 18 appears beside additional notes, only fighters — gain from having a strength above 15. The five rows that begin with "18/(01-50)" are described as "percentile strength," which we will discuss, but which first must wait while we discuss the bonuses offered "to hit" and "damage."

Described as hit probability by AD&D (a misnomer), the "to hit" table indicates the modifier the character with that strength adds or subtracts to the d20 when attempting to hit. Note that where strength is less than 8, a negative modifier is applied, so that a character with a 7 strength, rolling a d20 with the result of a 10, would count it as a 9. No benefit at all is gained to hit for strengths between 8 and 16, which should indicate to the player that unless they have a 16 to spend as an attribute on strength, it is not a good idea to choose a fighter as a class. True enough, the reader might remember that half-orcs gain +1 to their strength on account of being of that people; also, its worth noting that a person who is mature in age also gains +1 to their strength. Of this latter, there is only one race where the starting age permits this — the dwarf, with a 78.3% chance of rolling 11 or more on 5d4, has a good chance of reaching 51 age and thus being mature. Under these conditions, if the player had a 16 that could be placed under strength, it would be transformed to a 17 if the character were a half-orc, with a very good chance of it becoming 17 if the character were a dwarf.

Described as a damage adjustment by AD&D, it really is just the bonus damage that is added to the character's weapon die or dice when an opponent is hit. If a flail normally does 2-7 damage (1d6+1), then a 16 strength adds +1 to that damage, causing 3-8 damage instead. As before, choosing a half-orc or a dwarf as a character class can transform a 15 strength with adds no damage bonus, into a 16, giving at least +1.

Again, it can be seen that if a character has a strength of 5 or less (and only one character class exists that can have a strength this low, that being the illusionist), then 1 point of damage is subtracted whenever a hit against an opponent is achieved.

As written in AD&D, "fighters" with an 18 strength are entitled to roll percentile dice in order to generate a random number between 1 and 100. This number is obtained by rolling two d10, defining one as the 10s digit and the other as the 1s. Thus, we might roll a "3" on the first and a "4" on the second, which would be read as "34." If a zero is read on the first, then a four, the result would be read as "4." Two zeros would be read as "100." On the table, this is shown as "00" and is colloquially described as "double-zero" or "double-naught." The rolled number above is attached to "18" thusly: if the player were to roll "34", the character's strength would be described as "eighteen thirty-four" — and would give the bonuses as written (+1 to hit, +3 damage) that are found on the row 18/(01-50).

With regards to strength points gained or lost due to aging effects, AD&D argues that the 18 of exceptional strength should be counted as a whole number — so that when the 18 strength is reduced by 1 point, it becomes a 17 and the percentage bonus is lost entirely — regardless of what the percentage may have been. It's not explicitly stated if the reverse is true: if, upon moving from a 17 to an 18, a percentage bonus is obtained. Additionally, the very same page of the DMG has a rule that discounts what's just been said, stating that the strength point lost from 18 does not, in fact, cause the character's exceptional strength to reduce to 17, but is in fact only halved. An inconsistency in the rules like this, occurring here on the same page, can be very frustrating.

In either case, the line in the table that shows an 18 strength with no percentage next to it is not explained. Further, the statement that exceptional strength applies only to the "fighter" does not distinguish between the fighter class specifically, or if it includes the fighter sub-classes, the paladin and the ranger, as well.

Standard practice reaching back to the 1970s with the start of D&D, these issues encouraged some participants to discount exceptional strength as a game rule, allowing an 18 strength the bonuses of +1+2 only. These same persons argued that the excessive bonuses overbalanced the fighter. Most assumed exceptional strength applied to both the paladin and the ranger. A house rule of +10% or -10% were applied to adjustments to percentile strength, rather than removing the whole point or halving the percentage. This meant that a young adult character with an 18/34 strength would become 18/44 upon reaching maturity. As there are other ways in the game to lose or gain strength by magic, these adjustments helped solve the problem that arose through AD&D's silence. Some fixes were later brought in with the publication of the book, Deities & Demigods, but because this was not counted as one of the three original books, many did not count Deities as canon.

Because of the importance of the fighter and strength bonuses to the game, these errors in design and judgement related to strength were one of the flaws in AD&D that would prove fatal as the game community evolved.

One last point: strength bonuses, either "to hit" or for damage, do not apply to missile weapons. This deliberately compels combatants to engage directly in a fight in order to benefit from strength. Missile weapons are affected by dexterity, which will be discussed at a later time.

Experience Levels

As a reminder, we said earlier that as characters defeat opponents through removing their hit points until game death occurs, they earn "experience points." These accumulate and are tracked by the player during game play. We can now talk more about how experience points (commonly shortened to "X.P.") are rewarded and how they accumulate.

Let's suppose that the reader's fighter engages in combat with another fighter of equal ability. We know from earlier that a beginning fighter, called "1st level," begins with 1d10 hit points, to which is added constitution bonuses. Let's assume that both fighters have a constitution of 16 and that they both, therefore, have 12 hit points. We'll call the reader's fighter "Albert" and the enemy fighter "the Other," because we don't know their name. Albert rolls to hit, misses, then the Other hits and causes 4 points of damage with a spear to Albert. The fight goes on and Albert wins, with 3 hit points while the Other reaches zero and dies. Now it is time to award Albert his experience points for winning the fight.

Rewarding X.P. is the dungeon master's role; a chart is consulted and it turns out that Albert receives 20 X.P. + 2 X.P. for every hit point the other had. The Other had 12 hit points, so 12 x 2 = 24; add this to 20 and the total 44 X.P. The reader, as the player, writes this number down on the character sheet where all the character's information is kept (there can be multiple sheets that are used). This total never goes away. Henceforth, all other experience gained through the game is then added to whatever was gained before, so that the number accumulates until a threshold is passed that will make Albert "2nd level."

But we're not done. Let us assume the Other also had some gold pieces in their pocket. Gold pieces (or g.p.) are a form of money, which is used to buy things, which we shall certainly address when that becomes necessary. Gold pieces are also, when they are taken from an enemy, counted as experience: 1 gold piece = 1 experience. If the Other had 56 g.p. on hand, that's an additional 56 X.P. for Albert, bringing the total to 100 X.P. altogether.

Fighter Experience Table
Level	Min. X.P.	Hit Dice	Level Title
1st	0	1	veteran
2nd	2,001	2	warrior
3rd	4,001	3	swordsman
4th	8,001	4	hero
5th	18,001	5	swashbuckler
6th	35,001	6	myrmidon
7th	70,001	7	champion
8th	125,001	8	superhero
9th	250,001	9	lord
10th	500,001	9+3	lord (10th level)
11th	750,001	9+6	lord (11th level)
250,000 experience points per level for each additional level beyond the 11th level
Fighters gain 3 h.p. per level after 9th

Let us look at the experience table for the fighter, shown now on the right. It can be seen that a 1st level fighter (a "veteran") must reach a threshold of 2,001 X.P. in order to reach 2nd level (a "warrior"). For the record, these level titles are in fact rarely used, but they are included here from the rules. This can seem like a long haul, particularly as Albert lost three quarters of his hit points in the fight with the Other, and the knowledge that he would have to win 19 more such battles in order to accumulate 2,000 X.P., which would still leave him 1 X.P. short of 2nd level. It's good to remember, therefore, that Albert isn't alone; Albert is a member of the "party," the group of characters run by the players who gather together to play D&D. These players support each other, so that should Albert be close to death, there's a good chance he'll be able to withdraw or receive support from someone else, who might heal Albert or dispatch the Other for him. This makes the prospect of 19 more "Others" feel more doable.

Yet, experience is divided, so the other party members must also dispatch their 20 or so Others to reach their second level, so how does this work? Well, the players will find that when a bunch of Others are met at once — whatever monsters or humanoids they might be — the treasure tends to be a lot more than 56 g.p. per individual. Treasures can include hundreds, even thousands of gold, which can be divided between the party members; there might be special gems or pieces of jewelry, or magical potions, or indeed fabulous magical items of all kinds, which will be explained and discussed in their turn, far down the road at this time. Too, the DM might assign bounties on specific enemies or monsters, allowing even more reward than what the enemies have in their camp, or "lair," as it is often called. Some lairs might, too, be made of multiple fights, each of which can be won in their turn, allowing even more treasure at the end of a tough grind. Oh yes, there are ways for a party to reach those large numbers that are shown on the table. Many ways.

But... we are only beginning to delve into such things. For now, it is enough to know how experience levels actually work. For the fighter, the column under "hit dice" is the most important number. This is the additional d10 (plus character bonus) that the player receives, adding that total to the previous hit points. For Albert, he might roll a "7" on a d10; with his 16 constitution, this becomes a "9," which is added to his previous total of 12. Albert now has a maximum of 21 hit points, which makes the distance from "full" to "zero" seem much wider, and much safer.

As with the initial die roll, if a constitution penalty reduces the number rolled below 1, that result is counted as a 1; such characters, then, would only add 1 point to their hit point total upon climbing to a new level — but of course, because a fighter must have a constitution of at least 7 to be a fighter, this would never be something the fighter class had to cope with.

It is an issue that's far, far away, but when the character reaches 10th level, no more additional "hit dice" are rolled. AD&D explains that the constitution bonus adjusts specifically the hit die, not the level; this means that once the fighter reaches 9th level, they have received all the hit dice and bonuses allowed. Thereafter, from 10th level on, the character gains 3 h.p. per level.

An important thing also happens at 9th level for the fighter. It is at that time that the fighter is judged to be a person of great worthiness — and so the DM will explain how it happens that a large group of soldiers, called "retainers," will come forward to pledge themselves in service to their "Lord," the level title the fighter has reached. This need not be explained here, it is a matter of much detail and isn't likely to come up any time soon... but it is only right that a player deciding if they wish their character to be a fighter might want to consider if this is a future they're prepared to wait for.

Proficiency Bonuses

As the fighter gains experience levels, a new weapon proficiency is added for every three levels above first, to the initial four proficiencies the fighter began with. This means that at 4th level, 7th, 10th and so on, the fighter looks over their choice of weapons and adds one of these as something the fighter is now "proficient" with. The -2 attack penalty then no longer applies to that weapon. Thus, if a fighter learns that there was a weapon they wish they had chosen at the start, an opportunity to add that weapon will come with time.

The Paladin

Now that we understand what a fighter is and what the character class can do, we can address a specialist version. A paladin is a fighter of knightly manners who is bound by a strict code of behaviour — and who, accepting this oath, is granted unusual powers in return. The class fights much as a fighter does, but gains protections against evil influence, a limited ability to heal the body and other special abilities and relationships that last only so long as the character maintains the faith. So long as the paladin's codes are met, all is well, but if the codes are broken, then the paladin is reduced to an ordinary fighter and these benefits are lost.

Evil

AD&D tends to define the concept of "evil" very poorly, and not in the manner which ordinary non-players have come to know the word. For AD&D, those who are evil are sometimes treated like members of a club, or a team — those fellows in the red jerseys over there, those guys are evil. This approach defangs the term, allowing the paladin to oppose the other side, transforming the paladin's oath into something that's no more than an inclination the paladin is expected to indulge.

Underneath this, however, AD&D invests real work into the dense, disturbing aspects of true "Evil," as a force, in the heaviest religious sense: many of the monsters dwell in a part of the setting that corresponds to the Christian underworld of the 13th century; the character's legitimate soul is something that can be crushed, possessed or literally turned to the dark side. Many of the games creatures are depicted as cruel, sadistic or slavering after power. It is only that these ideas are scattered, compartmentalised, carefully concealed beneath the surface rule-system, in part to assuage the temperaments of those who do not understand the game, in part because this really is where Evil lives — unseen, in the darkness, ever ready to strike.

It is this latter that gives the paladin's oath its weight. Though often represented otherwise, if "Evil" is given the meaning in the game that it earns by those creatures the game includes, and not by the "convenience mechanics" of what a paladin can get away with, then the code demands that the paladin gird up and seek out Evil in its lair, to rid the world of it. All too often, however, it is "evil" with a small "e" that gets quibbled over, as the subject degrades into whether or not a paladin is allowed to remain such when failing to pay their bill at the tavern. This is unworthy of the game — which I hope this distinction reveals.

The Paladin's Codes

By way of an introduction, alignment is a crude classification device invented to frame a moral philosophy which can then be imposed against the player's freedom of action. On the surface, the design is for alignment to create two essential "camps" of social legitimacy: "good people" from "evil people." At the extreme, the truly good respect order, justice and a fixed ideal of social responsibility. On the other hand, truly bad people are selfish, resent others and wish to wreck or harm all they see. As antitheses, these are rational; as "game rules," they are far too vague, fluid and presumptive that persons are all this or all that, and not a constant maelstrom of both, as the parable of the two wolves tells. It's a weak, very dated ideal of understood behaviour, and was even in the 1970s when it was proposed. We may assume it's purpose was to define sides for wargaming combat set-piece battles. As a structure for how a player ought to play their character, it's child-like in outline.

Because we are discarding rules that do not justify their existence — and alignment never does — we do not need it to explain the paladin's motivation to embrace light vs. darkness with regards to approaching play. We can easily see the paladin as a bearer of "goodness" in the ordinary definition of that word: a person concerned for others, ready to take action to defend the weak, one to put their body between danger and the helpless in order to keep the latter safe. This is more than enough to structure the paladin's motivation as a player character: do not do harm to others, and do no harm to one's self. All other prescriptions for how a paladin should act come under the heading of "rule over the player" rather than impose the ordinary boundaries upon the paladin's gameplay that any other character must obey.

AD&D rules dictate that if a paladin should fall from grace — that is, act in a way that is other than what the rules of alignment dictate — then the paladin is ordered to seek a holy person of "good alignment" in order to confess their sin and do penance, which usually takes the part of some quest or expectation from the DM that the misdeed should be made right. Failure to do so is to have one's paladinhood stripped away, so that the character becomes just an ordinary fighter.

This is clearly an arbitrary structure from the start; it is the DM that accuses the paladin of wrongdoing; it is arbitrary rule-maker that dictates there should be a penalty for "wrong behaviour" that only the paladin must obey; it is the DM who decides what the penance shall be; and it is the DM that decides when it is served. All of these things exist for one purpose, for which in fact AD&D does not even explain why it needs to exist: to bind the paladin to the DM's will. This is egregious. It deserves to be called out as bad game design and, indeed, an example of poor humanity. The rule encodes a hierarchy where one participant is authorised to pass moral judgement on another participant’s play and then impose an open-ended sentence. It's terrible.

The assumption is that this is necessary because the paladin is too advantageous without harsh behavioural shackles; yet the rules, as can be demonstrated through game play, do not support that assumption. An argument must be made that it is up to the player to decide what "codes" the player obeys... and to accept the punishments that can be measured in game terms. If a paladin does not act like one in front of the setting's observers, it is perfectly within their rights to catcall, throw rotten fruit and drive the paladin away. Shame for poor paladin-like behaviour is sufficient enough as a reason to obey one's codes — the fact that others, the remaining party members included, are free to express their opinions, has always carried its own sort of weight. Sooner or later, a paladin will find that a bad reputation has its own retribution, one that the DM can then explain without the need of arbitrary rulemaking. But, true enough, this is hard to grasp without a deeper understanding of the game, so let us continue with the presumption that paladins do not need rules to bind their behaviour.

The Paladin as Fighter

We begin by adjusting the foregoing explanation of the fighter as it pertains to the class of paladin. But first, let us examine again the attributes a paladin needs to become that class, in more detail.

To begin with, the player must have rolled an unadjusted 17 or 18 when generating ability stats, because it must be put under charisma. No people or aging effect can be employed to manouever a 16 into a 17. Thus, a number that would be valuable if placed under strength or constitution must be instead placed under a stat that provides no special benefit to the paladin's fighter needs.

Discussing the fighter, we made the argument that a fighter is quite ineffective in the role without a 17 strength. This is no less true for the paladin. Yes, the paladin gets other abilities, and those balance the need for strength somewhat, but in a fight, if the character cannot bring down the enemy with prowess, then the paladin as a fighter is still a liability. Therefore, although the paladin only needs a 12 strength by the rules, it isn't worth being a paladin if one does not the player has at least a 16 to spend under strength also. This doesn't give much of a bonus to damage, but it gives some; and remember, this is in addition to that 17 which must be spent under charisma.

And still there is constitution to be considered. The rules state that a paladin needs a constitution of at least 9, but in truth, without that hit point bonus that a constitution of at least 15 brings, our paladin is going to live on the edge of death far more often than will be comfortable. And seriously, with regards to both strength and constitution, a 16 and a 15 are not going to impress anyone — if a paladin is going to impress anyone AS a paladin, those initial rolls will have to include at least two 17s and a 16. And that doesn't yet count the important benefit of an armour class adjustment that's gained from having a high dexterity. And then still, the class needs a 13 wisdom and a 9 intelligence.

This gatekeeping structure is intentional. It says that yes, with the bare minimums, the player can "run" a paladin — a colloquialism for "play." But by the minimums, that won't be much of a paladin and in the long run, it won't be worth it. Thus the game ensures that only those who get very lucky at the outset can choose this option meaningfully, while many might never be lucky enough to roll as well as they ought. This will cause some players to decide, "Oh what the hell, it's not much of a paladin, but at least it is one." They're in their rights to do that. But most likely, they'll be disappointed when the paladin dies early, or they'll be disappointed when the paladin lives — and is still, at 8th level, chewing gravel while some well-statted fighter saves the day, because the character cannot hold their own against tougher monsters.

Statistics

Paladins, like fighters, get a d10 for hit points. They receive three proficiencies, not four. Traditionally, because there are certain "magic items" in the game that favour paladins, it's a good idea to take a long sword as one of these weapons. For clarity, a "magic item" is a device, one that comes in a great many forms, that improves one's fighting capability, one's defense against opponents, heals, or otherwise produces supernatural effects. It is enough to know for now that these items exist, and that one of them, called a "holy sword," is what every paladin wants to get their hands on.

Like the fighter, the paladin can choose any weapon, and the penalty for a non-proficiency is still -2 to hit. Paladins also gain a new proficiency at every third level above first: at 4th, at 7th, at 10th and so on.

Paladins can also employ any armour just like fighters can. The benefits are the same. And we should just go ahead and assume that paladins benefit from exceptional strength; the cost they pay in going up experience levels justifies this.

Special Paladin Benefits

Paladins gain a wide variety of special abilities that contribute to their game effectiveness as defenders of the party against the malevolence of others. To fully grasp these benefits, it will be necessary to explain a number of game elements in order to provide context. The description for each should be seen as an overview, not a complete study into the matter. Upon reflection, it would seem the best approach is to name the ability and then explain it's substance and context in the description afterward.

All paladins at 1st level on are able to do the following:

Detect evil, up to 60 ft. away. The rules expressly tell that this is something that's done when the player so desires for the character, and only if the paladin is concentrating on determinine if evil is present. It's also strongly implied that the paladin must do so in the right direction in order to detect the evil sought after. "Evil" here can best be interpreted in three ways: first, in the form of some entity conspiring to perform or commit a selfish, abusive act of some kind, strongly enough that it can be detected (evil by intent); second, that the entity itself is so filled with spite and darkness that it is, itself, evil (evil by nature); and thirdly, that so many acts of evil have been committed in a given space, or that it has somehow been transformed through a ritual, that the atmosphere or the room itself is a thing of evil (evil by taint).

The rule intends to constrain the paladin, insisting that the player remember this is an ability as a form of game play; unfortunately, because it must be declared to be useful, and because it might be useful at any time, it creates a pattern where the player states the intent every time a door is opened and every time the characters have moved a distance of more than sixty feet. This becomes numbingly annoying for the remainder of the party — and creates a game moment when, invariably, the one time the player does not mention the ability, that's when evil is present. Thus, instead of creating a buffer to expertise, it creates a refrain and then ill feelings when the refrain is forgotten. The rule creates a "gotcha," and gotchas are social poison. The rule actually works quite well if the responsibility is shifted to the DM; if the paladin's detect evil is managed in the same way as one might detect a change in temperature, the refrain falls away, the gotcha falls away, and the ability proves not to be so powerful that it actually needs a constraint. But this addendum is not canon in AD&D.

Make all saving throws at +2. Earlier, we described a "saving throw" as a game mechanic used to convey sudden danger. In a larger sense, there are situations that cannot be resolved by the traditional "to hit" combat procedure — a cloud of released super-heated steam, for example, cannot be protected against with armour or easily ignored with hit points. Poison, too, might circumvent the character's bodily defences and simply kill a person. The saving throw exists as a form of "luck." When the steam was released, the character just happened to have wandered over there and was therefore never in the steam's path; or the steam was stirred somehow, so that the character was only lightly affected. The poison wasn't swallowed; the lightning bolt struck three feet to the left; this helps convey the idea. The paladin's +2 is added to the die roll that "saves" the character, thus making the paladin naturally luckier than others. We might even assume that the gods are paying attention.

Immunity to all forms of disease. Disease does occur in AD&D, and there are rules that stipulate how chronic or fatal it is; but for the most part, these tables are only invoked when certain kinds of monsters, those that spread disease, are confronted. Players tend to be resistant to the notion that disease can "just happen" in game, though rules do exist for this also. As such, while a useful benefit, it isn't commonly needed.

Cure disease. This logically follows from the previous immunity. The ability can be performed once per week, with an additional recipient being made possible for each five levels above first: two persons at 6th level, three at 11th, four at 16th and so on. The degree of effect is not stated, or how the healing is accomplished, but we can assume from literature that it means utter and instant restoration to perfect health, upon the touch of the paladin.

Lay on hands. This is a form of healing, in which the paladin is able to restore lost hit points by touch. It is framed as a religious benefit, the sort traditionally associated with saints or modern faith-healers — except, of course, the restoration of loss is in fact restored. A paladin can heal 2 hit points per experience level, one time per day. This last suggests that these points must together be expended upon a single person — including the paladin's self, if so desired — rather than two persons, which would stipulate the laying would have to happen twice. Still, it is arguable that the "one a day" refers to the number of hit points, and not to how many times the hands are laid on.

Protection from evil in a 10 ft. radius. This translates to an increased armour class benefit of 2 against the attacks of evil creatures, which are legion in AD&D; in numbers, this would reduce the character's normal armour class of 10 without armour to AC 8. The enchantment further prevents bodily contact from those creatures whose nature is that of evil. Without dredging up the long list of such creatures, we might imagine just one example: the zombie, which normally attacks with it's claws. Because this is a bodily attack, paladins are safe from harm — they cannot even be touched. We may imagine that in visual terms, this does not manifest as zombie's hands bouncing against an invisible shield, but more that zombies are forced to cower and resist attempting to attack on account of this protection.

Because this radius extends around the paladin, others who are allied to the paladin are assumed to be likewise affected by this protection effect. Further, as protection from evil invokes a spell of the same name (this being a form of magic created by spellcasting characters, to be discussed later), those inside the circle also enjoy a +2 saving throw as well, which the paladin also naturally enjoys.

Some argue that this assumes the latter group must be of the same alignment as the paladin (aka, the same "team"), and not "neutral," "chaotic" or "evil" themselves, as they might secretly be according to the game's alignment rules. This distinction is for the DM to call. Still, it necessarily begs the question why a paladin, committed to resistance against — and even the persecution of — evil, would consent to give a pass to those persons in the party who were of that nature, who would almost certainly be "accidentally" outed on one of the occasions when the paladin sought to detect evil. Furthermore, wouldn't it be obvious that a paladin would want to be sure there were no evil persons about, and thus subject everyone they met, ultimately, to this detection? This is something that AD&D intentionally lampshades, for it makes no effort at all to dictate what alignment of persons are allowed to fraternise with each other, preferring to let each player decide for the character in their own way.

Paladin Experience Table
Level	Min. X.P.	Hit Dice	Level Title
1st	0	1	gallant
2nd	2,751	2	keeper
3rd	5,501	3	protector
4th	12,001	4	defender
5th	24,001	5	warder
6th	45,001	6	guardian
7th	95,001	7	chevalier
8th	175,001	8	justiciar
9th	350,001	9	paladin
10th	700,001	9+3	paladin (10th level)
11th	1050,001	9+6	paladin (11th level)
350,000 experience points per level for each additional level beyond the 11th level
Paladins gain 3 h.p. per level after 9th

Additional powers are gained as the paladin achieves experience levels:

At 3rd level, turn undead. The term "undead" describes monsters in the game representing various creatures from literature who have "returned from the dead" in some fashion: the aforementioned zombies, vampires, animated skeletons, ghouls and so on. These creatures are evil by nature, in that they are either motivated to kill mindlessly or with delight; very often, to increase their own number, as dying at the hands of the undead often causes the victim to "rise" as undead also. The paladin's ability to "turn" these creatures is to force them to give ground and hold their distance, rather than any notion of causing them to flee. We may imagine the iconic image of Dr. Van Helsing holding a cross, forcing Dracula back. Rules for turning undead will be addressed when we discuss the clerical class, for the cleric is more the master of this ability than the paladin.

At 4th level, call for a mystical warhorse. At first glance, it appears that the paladin need only call for this remarkable steed, described as a heavy "warhorse" — a mount designed for war, much like the destrier from knightish tales. The horse has an armour class of 5, and rolls five eight-sided dice, plus 5, for it's hit points (5d8+5). It is as fast as a horse that is two-thirds its size, presumed loyal and will serve the paladin until it's death. It even has an intelligence of 5-7 points, so that we may assume — though the books do not state this — that is it capable of understanding the paladin... and if literature is to embraced, this understanding passes both ways.

We're given a rule about it's hit points as well, to ensure that they're above average; if the paladin calls for the horse at once, at 4th level, then each die that's rolled cannot be a "1," with such being re-rolled. The minimum number at any rate is half the paladin's level, so that a 6th level could not roll less than a "3" on each dice and an 8th level could not roll less than a "4." No explanation is given for if the paladin is an odd-numbered level, so the DM would have to invent a rule for this.

Unfortunately, AD&D then devolves into yet another attempt to contain the benefit of this "gain." The DMG outlines rules that dictate that the horse's appearance may not be where the paladin is, but rather some locale within seven days that the paladin magically becomes aware of. Thereafter, the paladin must face an ordeal to "win" the horse. If the horse is ever lost, another cannot be found—and no reason for this is given—for ten years, presumably so the paladin does not mistreat or otherwise fail to properly respect this "gift" the paladin has already earned by reaching 4th level. And finally, yes, there is a note that the failure of paladins to adhere to their codes, bringing loss of their paladinhood, also means a permanent loss of the horse.

And once again we see an example of AD&D attempting to arbitrarily transformed a legitimate affordance that the paladin is owed into a side-quest. The ten-year lockout is nakedly punitive, the ordeal is merely DM's entitlement. As before, there's no reason to create this hoop for the paladin to jump through: the horse is marvellous, but it's not outlandishly powerful and in fact it is one of the reasons players become paladins: to enjoy the union between themselves and a mythical animal. It is recommended that all such rules of this nature pertaining to the paladin's warhorse be simply ignored. It will not affect the game's play.

At 9th level, clerical spell-use. With "spells" being an immense, involved subject in AD&D, we have done our best not to invest too deeply into these, as it would be difficult to discuss them briefly without in turn merely raising more questions. It is still too early to do so now, but we shall say this: spells represent magical attacks, defenses and other affordances that greatly benefit the "spellcaster" and the party. They are employed by mages, clerics, druids and illusionists, and shall be discussed in depth at that time. It would be best for the present to suspend the paladin's use of these spells for when we discuss the cleric, so that we are not repeating information. The whole of this work, at any rate, will need to be read before a complete beginner's understanding of AD&D can be had, so we need not try to provide this information early when it is better provided later.

Paladin Constraints

Last, from the Players Handbook, we're given a group of constraints designed to encode the aforementioned codes as something the player must obey as regards the paladin's behaviour outside the day-to-day of game play. These can be categorised into three structures: the paladin association with others; the paladin's ownership of wealth; and the paladin's freedom to employ the game benefit of magic items. None of these are explained in game terms, nor do they apply to any other character to the same degree and in the same way. They are, we must guess, an ever more nitpicky way to pester and limit the player's agency where a paladin character is concerned.

Briefly, because it is not recommended that these petty "rules" be observed, the paladin must not fraternise with bad people (as defined by the DM, presumably), must hand over earned wealth to a non-player run church, must not employ wealth in any great degree beyond the bare minimum of hirelings and a "small castle", and must not have more than ten magic items. These are even listed by category: not more than 1 piece of armour, 1 shield, 4 weapons and 4 other magic items.

As written in the Players Handbook, these do not model a stable, knowable constraint inside the setting; they model a permission for the DM to nitpickingly penalise a player at will. This only creates an incentive for players to never choose the paladin class as an option, which is a terrible shame.

The Ranger

This second specialist version of the fighter class is perceived to be a rugged individual whose ordinary life is spent in the woods, as a forester, a pathfinder and a bit of a recluse. AD&D describes the class as "adept at woodcraft, tracking, scouting and infiltration, and spying." Yet, little of this is supported by the game's rules. The DMG describes some rules for spying, but attributes them to another class, the assassin. A rule for tracking exists and will be discussed herein. But no instructions are provided for woodcraft, scouting or infiltration. In practice, the ranger's identity for the game is more a matter of premise and tone than of a skillset the player can use.

We're told that rangers are of good alignment, but like the paladin this can be discarded with little effect. There are again restrictions applied to the ranger class that exist as meaningless boundaries that again might be interpreted as "necessary" limitations on a strong class, but this is never actual stated or argued for. The ranger, too, is threatened with loss of rangerhood if compliance is not received. This is already a tired issue and we can just move on.

Paladin Experience Table
Level	Min. X.P.	Hit Dice	Level Title
1st	0	2	runner
2nd	2,251	3	strider
3rd	4,501	4	scout
4th	10,001	5	courser
5th	20,001	6	tracker
6th	40,001	7	guide
7th	90,001	8	pathfinder
8th	150,001	9	ranger
9th	225,001	10	ranger knight
10th	325,001	11	ranger lord
11th	650,001	11+2	ranger lord (11th level)
12th	975,001	11+4	ranger lord (11th level)
325,000 experience points per level for each additional level beyond the 12th level
Rangers gain 2 h.p. per level after 9th

The Ranger as Fighter

As before, let's discuss the attributes a ranger needs to become that class in more detail. As before, the ranger needs to be a strong fighter, so the player ought to have sufficient attribute rolls to contribute to strength and constitution — though, as will be seen, constitution can take a third position behind dexterity. Rangers tend to rely a little more upon the bow and missile weapons in general, and dexterity provides bonuses to hit for these (though again, we'll still leave a discussion of this for when we discuss the thief). But it doesn't hurt to remember that we need a 13 strength and a 14 constitution to be a ranger regardless. Dexterity need only be at least a 6, by the rules.

The other two minimums are intelligence, which cannot be less than 13, and wisdom, which cannot be less than 14. These may seem like "dump stats," where the bare minimum can be applied. Yet this is only true until the ranger reaches 8th level. Then, like the paladin gains some clerical spells, the ranger picks up some druidical spell ability; for this, it's good to have a 15 or better wisdom. At 9th level, the ranger gains magical spell ability — and for this, it's good to have a 15 or better intelligence.

If it sounds like I'm saying the ranger character ought to have five scores of 15 or more, and that strength should be at least a 17, then the message is getting through. It doesn't hurt to have an above average charisma, either, though that need only be a 6. Rangers are best when they're composed of well-rounded high numbers; and while the bare minimums can be used, they won't make a satisfying ranger.

Statistics

Unlike most classes, rangers start with two hit dice. These are not ten-sided, but 2d8 for hit points (2-16). And if the earlier explained "houserule" about hit points is used, the total is 16 — and here is the real bonus: if the character has a constitution bonus, it is applied to BOTH hit dice. This is why, if the player has a 15 and a 16 attribute to spend, the 15 can be spent on constitution because the character doubles that +1 bonus at the character's start. As for that imagined 16 dexterity... well, we're getting to that.

Rangers receive three proficiencies, not four. Again for reasons that we'll see, taking a bow of some kind is definitely the best choice a ranger can make, regardless of the other weapons chosen. Like other fighter classes, the ranger can choose any weapon, and the penalty for a non-proficiency is still -2 to hit. Rangers also gain a new proficiency at every third level above first: at 4th, at 7th, at 10th and so on.

Rangers can also employ any armour just like fighters can. The benefits are the same. And yes, it's a good idea if they also get exceptional strength; they also pay a heavy cost in experience to go up levels.

Special Ranger Benefits

The ranger's affordances aren't quite as wide-ranging as those of the paladin, but they are decidedly effective in certain kinds of game play. As before, in explaining these benefits, it will be necessary to explain a number of game elements in order to provide context. The description for each should be seen as an overview, not a complete study into the matter. Rangers of 1st level are able to perform the abilities listed below as surprise, level damage bonus and tracking.

Surprise

With every combat that occurs, a judgment must be made by the DM: is it possible that one or both sides of the conflict might be taken unawares, and thus be unable to act immediately when confronted? This roll is called "checking for surprise," in which one or both sides roll a d6. Normally, if a 1 or 2 is rolled (this is called in game language, "2 in 6"), then surprise occurs. This number can be adjusted, however. Rangers, for example, when encountering others, move so stealthily that they surprise others "3 in 6," or when a 1, 2 or 3 is rolled. At the same time, the ranger only on a "1 in 6." Surprise can matter a great deal in a fight. Whichever side is not surprised is able to attack first, and often to great benefit — and rangers, more often than other classes, benefit often from this.

And here is where the above mentioned dexterity bonus matters. A 16 dexterity allows a +1 bonus to hit with missile weapons, like the bow. A 17 dex allows +2 and an 18, +3. Because the ranger is understood to know the wilderness (though there are no specific rules for this, the surprise benefit implies this), it allows the ranger to stand, fairly easily surprise an enemy, fire a bow, then drop out of sight again before the enemy can truly react (because they were surprised). It doesn't always work, of course, in reality only half the time: but that to hit bonus is terrific when this sort of hit-and-run tactic is employed.

It's important that we be clear about what "concealing and repositioning" means. These are choices of movement that matter in game play, not defacto class abilities possessed by the ranger. Any character can plausibly hide in brush; any player can crawl through it. It is only that the ranger's ability to employ surprise makes this tactic more effective.

Level Damage Bonus

When fighting specified humanoid peoples, rangers add 1 h.p. per level they've attained to the weapon damage they do, when in hand-to-hand melee combat. These peoples include bugbears, ettins, giants, gnolls, goblins, hobgoblins, kobolds, ogres, ogre magi, orcs and trolls. It's understood that this list will sound unfamiliar, and there isn't space to explain these creatures in depth here; rest assured that in AD&D, they represent aggressive, dangerously organised societies bent upon the destruction of civilised culture, order and reason; some are cannibalistic, some are evil in intent, all are a threat to the player characters in particular, who are apt to meet such groups along their way. The damage bonus works thusly: if the ranger were, say, 2nd level, and hitting with a long sword that causes 1-8 damage, then the ranger would add whatever strength bonus they possessed — and then, on top of that, add +2 h.p. damage as well for being a ranger. This makes the ranger very effective against these creatures... which makes sense, since the ranger lives upon the edges of civilisation, where they are the most likely persons to have experience with these raiders and invaders.

Tracking

This is the practice of following a quarry by reading the physical evidence they leave behind as they move through an environment — this includes obvious signs like footprints, broken branches, scuffed stones, bent grass, disturbed leaf litter, drag marks, blood, hair, droppings and displaced soil, to name an assortment of things. This is what is meant when a tracker says that they've found "sign." Rangers are allowed this ability, but unfortunately it must be said that the ability itself is poorly managed in AD&D.

Underground Tracking
Feature tracked through	% success
a corridor or room	65%
traversing a door or stairwell	55%
passing through a trap door	45%
traversing a chimney or passing through a concealed door	35%
passing through a secret door	25%

The table labeled Underground Tracking shows an attempt to provide rules for tracking in a subterranean setting. The phrasing of the original rules has been changed here to help clarify the meaning of the percentages quoted; an explanation is not provided in any part of AD&D's rules. An effort here has been made to clarify the language used; the original list appears on p.24 of the Players Handbook. For the Underground Table, We are told that the creature to be tracked must have been observed within 30 minutes of the attempt to track — which seems to suggest that the ranger's ability, at least underground, cannot rely upon observing sign alone, which does not in any manner reflect any handbook or literary reference I've ever read or seen. Usually, sign alone is sufficient evidence to show that a creature passed through. Further, the one serious obstacle to tracking is precipitation... which cannot occur in the underground except where water drips from above, which no one has thought to include in the list of obstacles to be tracked through here. Without precipitation, sign has the potential to remain in place and observable for a period of literally years, even in some cases, centuries. The writers here are clearly unaware of this.

To explain what is being tracked through, briefly: a corridor is a dug-out passage, often depicted in D&D as inset with flat stone pieces to prevent degradation; a room is any open space underground, but usually refers to one that has been hollowed out, not a cavern. Doors made of wood, which must be brought down from the surface, are commonly presented as existing between constructed underground spaces. Stairs allow easy passage up or down by steps. Trap doors underground are of course doors that open to a space above or below. Chimneys are naturally occurring or mined vertical shafts. Concealed doors are exits that have been somehow hidden by objects or false fronts. Secret doors are clever passages built into the construction that can be opened by knowing where to press or what mechanisms to activate. We might remember from an earlier discussion in character creation that elves and half-elves that these peoples are good at finding concealed and secret doors.

Presumably, when tracking a creature through one of these environments, a die must be rolled to determine success. It can be seen easily that odds are that a creature that does no more than move down a corridor, through a door and then up a flight of stairs requires the ranger to roll chance of success three times, with a mere 19⅓ per cent chance of success. Three actions like this require less than 30 seconds to perform, whereas the creature might have gone through twenty or thirty such places in ten minutes. This does not suggest tracking is very effective. Moreover, no adjustment is offered in AD&D for improving this ability. A 1st level ranger has the same chance of tracking as one of 10th level. This does not make sense as an ability as they are normally structured everywhere else.

Outdoor Tracking
Feature tracked through	% adjustment
for each creature above 1 in the party being tracked	+2%
for every 24 hours that have elapsed between making the track and tracking	-10%
for each hour of precipitation	-25%

For Outdoor Tracking, we are told there is a base 90% chance of the ranger being able to follow a creature, which is modified by the adjustments given. This would mean that if the ranger were tracking six persons that chanced to pass by this point the same day, tracking is automatic (five more persons than one, x2%, +90%, equals 100%). Thus, to shake off the ranger underground, in an environment that is wholly man-made, it takes ten minutes to completely obscure the track, but in the whole of the outdoors, so long as it hasn't rained for an hour (strictly read, 20 minutes of rain provides no penalty), tracking is a fingersnap. In fact, to take this further, if 21 persons travelled past this point four days ago, and it hasn't rained, again, success is utterly certain. Interesting. A mechanic like this does not need an adjustment for the ranger's level. This is how AD&D defines tracking. I suggest it is an area needful of a DM's intervention.

Abilities Unlocked by Level

At 8th level, rangers gain druid spells. As with the paladin, it would be best to describe this ability as it is gained when discussing druidical spells as a form, when we discuss the druid. That class will need to be read before the nature of such spells can be properly understood.

At 9th level, rangers gain magic-user spells. Here, again, it would be best to describe these when discussing the magic-user character.

Upon reaching the 10th level of experience, a ranger attracts a body of 2-24 followers, which AD&D describes as "henchmen" but whom we shall call "henchfolk;" these are a sort of hireling who is meant to attend and act on the character's behalf, though AD&D never really defines the term. In this context, these followers may also be described as "retainers" — persons who are kept in the service to their liege, bound in this case by duty or loyalty. It is uncommon that a player achieves a level this high through game play. For the ranger, these retainers are generated through rules that can be found in the Dungeon Masters Guide, which this work, and not in this volume, shall cover at another time.

Ranger Constraints

As with the paladin, AD&D seeks to restrict the player's freedom in managing their ranger, with these being yet more frivolous. We are told that if the ranger ever performs an act that is "not good," then the character is to be stripped of their rangerhood to become a fighter. How this works, given that the ranger's benefits are largely mundane and not magical in nature, is not explained, but we must ask — does the ranger forget how to fight these monsters, or how to surprise others, or how to track? Or are we to assume that in fact these abilities are magical in nature, though that's not explained either?

We're also told that the ranger cannot hire men-at-arms, servants, aides or henchfolk prior to the 8th level; and that no more than three rangers may ever operate together; and that rangers can only own goods and treasure that they're able to carry on their own person. Rangers, apparently, cannot own a mule, either, unless it is carried on the ranger's back, and certainly the ranger cannot own anything kept on the mule... but then, what is ownership exactly? Is a ranger allowed to borrow things from others?

Finally, we're told that any excess wealth must be given to a worthy communal or institutional cause — which, again, cannot be another player. Such arbitrary ideas are, really too much to countenance. If we discard all this and allow the ranger to be the character, rest assured, no harm shall befall the game's play.

Not the original

The Thief

Even in its earliest printing, AD&D recognised that the thief class was something that needed to be laundered as a thing morally neutral. Yet while one book tells us that as a profession, thieves are neither honourable nor dishonorable, another provides an infamous illustration on page 24: with one thief dead before a chest of treasure, murdered by another, the caption reads, "There is no honor among Thieves..." It is obviously not the apology we are given by an uncomfortable author, but the picture, that tells us the truth about the thief character.

Nevertheless, the class is built from affordances that, while the setting might treat as offensive, are of great value to a player party: concealment, gaining access, light fingers and ambush — not to mention the ability to contact and converse with a connected underworld and needful black market. These are useful procedures in a dangerous world, regardless of whether these skills are considered right by polite society. Sometimes, a party has to get their hands dirty.

Because the thief is physically the weakest member of the party — better in combat than the magic-user or illusionist, but without the ability to produce the raw power of those classes — they must survive much of the time by withdrawal or by avoidance. Where possible, they'll seek to get behind an enemy, where they can attack in their best manner: a neatly done stab in the back, however cruel. For many thieves, this ability to "back stab" is their bread and butter. We shall explain how it works shortly.

Choosing Stats

A thief really is the dexterity, which provides defense and a strong benefit to the chief affordances a thief has, the "thieving abilities." Given the weaknesses of the character class, without a dexterity it can be difficult — but, for reasons we shall see, it's probably the best class to pick if the character has no attribute rolls at all above 14. After dexterity, constitution is probably the best choice, so long as its remember that a 17 constitution for the thief functions like a 16 (still adding only a +2 bonus to h.p. if the character is not a fighter). A 17, therefore, would probably do better under strength. A good charisma is not really designed to help if the thief gets caught by authorities (though a soft-hearted DM may take it into account). Though some books try to put value on a thief having a high intelligence, there's no mechanical benefit comes from it.

Thieves' Weapons and Armour

Compared to a fighter, the thieves' combat effectiveness is drastically curtailed. To start, they receive only 2 proficiencies. While some might believe that "back stabbing" can only be done with a dagger or a sword, the Players Handbook makes it clear that a club is sufficient — and therefore, this ability is not a consideration for choice of weapon.

Thieves are limited to clubs, daggers, darts, slings and three kinds of sword: the short, the broad and the long sword. All but the sword can be fired or thrown — thus the club is preferable to the sword as a main weapon, not only because it can be thrown but because it's cheap and easy to make. A dagger is the most easily hidden and the least likely to get in the way when infiltrating, climbing a wall or committing a burglary. A new weapon proficiency is not added until every four levels above first, at 5th level, 9th, 13th and so on. The penalty for using a weapon one is not proficient in is -3 "to hit."

Thieves are also limited by AD&D to specifically leather armour and that they're not permitted the use of a shield. It is firmly implied that studded leather is outside their class, but the use of padded armour is not excluded by the language used and so falls into the DM's discretion. It is because of this limited availability of armour that a high dexterity is so important.

Thieves get a d6 for hit points.

Dexterity

Dexterity Table
Dexterity	AC Adjustment	Reaction/Missile Adjustment
3	-4	-3
4	-3	-2
5	-2	-1
6	-1	nil
7-14	nil	nil
15	+1	nil
16	+2	+1
17	+3	+2
18	+4	+3

Until now, we've been avoiding giving a clear overview of the character's dexterity bonuses, making this table long overdue. One reason for putting it off is the inconvenience of the manner in which armour class works, which deserves a brief review now. As a reminder, armour class (AC) without any armour equals "10". Typically, throughout AD&D, any benefit to AC is expressed as a "+"; a "shield +1" for example is a magical item that provides the protection of a shield +1 more, or an improvement of 2 points of AC. A fighter armed with a shield like this and no other armour would count as AC 8. Thus, where the table expresses a negative number under AC adjustment (also sometimes called a "defensive adjustment"), that makes armour class worse. A character with a 3 dexterity would naturally have an armour class of 14, which would be the same as saying that an opponent would have "+4 to hit AC 10."

This backward thinking takes a little practice, but once it's understood it becomes second nature, a 15 dexterity improves AC by 1 point. Thus, while a thief may be only AC 8 when wearing leather and no shield, the same thief with an 18 dexterity is AC 4, the equivalent of chain mail & shield. This same adjustment applies to any other class also. If a fighter were dressed in chain mail & shield, and had an 18 dexterity, they would be AC 0 ("AC zero"). If that shield were also a +1 magical shield, the fighter's AC would be -1 ("AC minus one").

As a "defensive adjustment," this bonus is also applied to saving throws, which we've briefly discussed before. This is only true in cases where defense against the attack is logically dodging, such as with the aforementioned lightning bolt; a "fireball," which is a kind of spell, is also listed as an example. This bonus is not applied to things like being poisoned. AD&D, unfortunately, is never clear about any other form of attack that can't be dodged.

The second column applies, first, to the character's ability to hit with missiles, which was briefly discussed under missile weapons. When firing a bow or a sling, as said, strength is not considered for "to hit" and "damage." Instead, the modifier to hit is given above, under dexterity, either negative in the case of a low dexterity (making it harder to hit) or as a positive for a high dexterity. No damage benefit from dexterity or strength is applied to missile weapons that are either thrown or fired.

This same bonus also applies to the aforementioned case of the ranger's ability to surprise. The exact rules surrounding surprise are somewhat detailed and so they won't be recounted here — it is enough to know that the reaction adjustment here is important in defining how much time an enemy has to attack the character or be attacked; and that this same adjustment is also applied to "initiative," which is likewise a game rule designed to manage combatants when they engage with one another.

Thieving Abilities

Dexterity Affected Abilities
X.P. Level	Pick Pockets	Open Locks	Find or Remove Traps	Move Silently	Hide in Shadows
1	30%	25%	20%	15%	10%
2	35%	29%	25%	21%	15%
3	40%	33%	30%	27%	20%
4	45%	37%	35%	33%	25%
5	50%	42%	40%	40%	31%
6	55%	47%	45%	47%	37%
7	60%	52%	50%	55%	43%
8	65%	57%	55%	62%	49%
9	70%	62%	60%	70%	56%
10	80%	67%	65%	78%	63%
People	Ethnic Adjustments
dwarf	nil	+10%	+15%	nil	nil
elf	+5%	-5%	nil	+5%	+10%
gnome	nil	+5%	+10%	+5%	+5%
half-elf	+10%	nil	nil	nil	+5%
halfling	+5%	+5%	+5%	+10%	+15%
half-orc	-5%	+5%	+5%	nil	nil
human	nil
Dexterity	Dexterity Adjustments
9	-15%	-10%	-10%	-20%	-10%
10	-10%	-5%	-10%	-15%	-5%
11	-5%	nil	-5%	-10%	nil
12	nil	nil	nil	-5%	nil
13-15	nil
16	nil	+5%	nil	nil	nil
17	+5%	+10%	nil	+5%	+5%
18	+10%	+15%	+5%	+10%	+10%

This table from the Players Handbook has been deliberately curtailed (levels 11-17 can be found on page 28) as it is sufficient to provide the learning structure. To calculate the success chance of a given ability, the character adds the base number under the specific ability, adjusting it afterward for ethnicity and then dexterity. Adjustments for dexterities less than 9 are not given because this is the minimum number needed to become a thief. In each case, when attempting that ability, a d100 ("percentage die") is rolled to determine if the thief has been successful or not — the reader should remember this means two d10, with one designated before hand as "10s" and the other as "1s."

While wide-ranging and suitable for what a thief would likely be skilled at, it can be seen with each of these abilities that there are structural problems with how they can be meaningfully played in a setting, interpreted or reliably used by the player.

Picking Pockets

This describes the pilfering or filching of small items from another person, with a successful roll indicating they haven't realised that it's happened. Because the game rule includes "sleight of hand," this can be interpreted as the chance to cheat without being noticed at games like cards, casting lots or chuck-a-luck. The ability does not apply to meta-game examples of the player rolling game dice for the character's activities. Rolls that are above the percentage needed by not more than 20 percentage points fall into the range of "not noticed" and "attempt failed." Thus, if I have a 34% chance of cutting a stranger's purse, any roll between 35 and 54 indicates I did not get the purse, but also that I was not noticed in attempting to do so. Any roll of 55 or more (+21% above) indicates that I've both failed and been noticed doing it. The rules allow repeated attempts; the game also notes that a victim might notice and allow the thief to operate anyway, in order to track him or her back to the place that he or she uses as a headquarters. Up to two attempts at picking a pocket can be made during a minute's time (designated a "round" in combat).

AD&D imposes a further penalty upon success of -5% per level of the target above 3rd level; thus, -5% at 4th level, -10% at 5th level and so on, regardless of the thief character's level. On the surface, this seems fair, but because there's no way in game to identify the level of a given person, nor any guideline that states a person of such-and-such a level must be a person who appears to be of importance, this greatly increases the chance of a "gotcha" moment for a high level thief when the DM suddenly identifies the target as a 7th or 8th level person. As the thief's level improves, and the percentage chance also, this adjustment becomes less important — but two separate problems still exist regarding the ability.

The first is that no rule exists to designate what might be found in a pocket. There are references to "spell components" (needed objects that are used to cast some spells) being kept in a magic-user's pockets, but this is not definitive. More likely, the amount would be coins — but how many is entirely at the discretion of the DM, who has every reason to limit the amounts. In any case, what a pocket or pouch might contain cannot begin to compete with the plunder that's taken in a straight-up fight, where the thief has the party as allies for comfort. Further, as the thief rises in levels, making pickpocketing more possible, the value of what's taken diminishes by half with every level gained. A hundred gold pieces in a pouch for a 1st level might be meaningful; but for a 5th level the amount could be tossed as alms without a qualm, as by then many thousands of gold have been accumulated. Since most pouches tend to be measured in smaller coins (silver, copper) which are but a fraction of gold pieces, this ability becomes even more meaningless for game play.

Potentially, obtaining something from a setting resident's pocket — a key, a script of some sort, a desperately needed sigil — might decide the success or failure of an entire operation... but then, the DM would have to think of creating this need for this to work. And once created as a trope and used, then what? Have every adventure hinge on the thief's ability to pick pockets? It's not an idea that's sustainable. All these issues together — the various forms of "gotcha," the diminishing returns — cause players to literally forget their thieves even have this skill, so little is it used.

Open Locks

AD&D describes this as figuring out how to open "puzzle locks" or foiling magical closures, though at no time are these things defined in game terms. Usually, when a puzzle is met in game, this skill is not employable as the DM wishes for the players to figure it out, not make a die roll. "Thieves picks & tools" are presumed to be necessary for, and can be purchased in game at a dear cost. The rules dictate that only one attempt may be made per lock — and that, upon failing, "no amount of trying will ever enable" success with that lock — except that the next sentence states the thief can make another attempt, after gaining an experience level.

Historically, medieval locks weren't very complex... and further, anyone who has any skill in picking a lock knows that it isn't a question of "will I?" but "how long will this take?" Thieves are typically under a time constraint, as the owners or some other witness might appear at any time, and therefore can be foiled by modern locks that can't be picked in less than a minute. In D&D, this is rarely, if ever, the case. Most locks in the game do not arise from public doorways, but with locked treasures in chests after all the owners have been killed. Occasionally, a lock in a deserted hall or upon a gate in a wilderness is found, but then the thief ought to have as long as they need to open it. In short, with what we actually know about locks, the percentage application with this ability shouldn't be here.

AD&D does impose a time frame for attempting the opening of a lock: 1 to 10 rounds, which as has been said are equal to minutes. Modern locks, such as a standard residential door lock, made with precise engineered tools, takes nothing like this long. A medieval lock, made of wrought iron or brass, is far from this level of difficulty. In any case, it should be assumed that the thief will eventually crack the lock regardless.

The rule exists as written as a choke-point for the player's access to spaces or treasure. If the players must bash the door in because it can't be unlocked, or smash the chest to get at the treasure, then the ensuing noise can be used to bring more enemies as yet another "gotcha," allowing the DM to force the players to earn the treasure again, for no reason except that the thief rolled badly. Such tropes became game standards in early D&D as designers cleverly fit them into standard game modules and examples, allowing them to be reused again and again as adventure nostalgia.

Find/Remove Traps

A "trap" is defined by AD&D as a mechanical or magical device that can bge triggered, usually causing damage but potentially enclosing victims within a contained area. Examples include pits, pits with spikes, poison needles, falling blogs, triggered arrows or spears, broken vials that release gas and so on. Finding a trap requires 1-10 rounds

Both finding and removing traps are treated as two actions,

@@ Line 916: / Line 916: @@
 The rule exists as written as a choke-point for the player's access to spaces or treasure. If the players must bash the door in because it can't be unlocked, or smash the chest to get at the treasure, then the ensuing noise can be used to bring more enemies as yet another "gotcha," allowing the DM to force the players to earn the treasure again, for no reason except that the thief rolled badly. Such tropes became game standards in early D&D as designers cleverly fit them into standard game modules and examples, allowing them to be reused again and again as adventure nostalgia.
+=== Find/Remove Traps ===
+A "trap" is defined by AD&D as a mechanical or magical device that can bge triggered, usually causing damage but potentially enclosing victims within a contained area. Examples include pits, pits with spikes, poison needles, falling blogs, triggered arrows or spears, broken vials that release gas and so on. Finding a trap requires 1-10 rounds
+Both finding and removing traps are treated as two actions,

Difference between revisions of "Vol. 1 - Introducing Gameplay"

Revision as of 20:21, 20 January 2026

Contents

Foreword

Participants

The Dungeon Master

Players

The Character

Attributes

Character Class

Peoples

Gender

Hit Points

Character Age

Aging Adjustments

Appearance

The Fighter

Weapons

Damage

Primary Edged Weapons

Bludgeoning Weapons

Staves

Thrusting Weapons

Polearms

Missile Weapons

Damage vs. "Size L"

Proficiencies

Armour & Armour Class

Proficiency Penalty

Armour Types

Helmets

Dexterity Effects on AC

Strength

Experience Levels

Proficiency Bonuses

The Paladin

Evil

The Paladin's Codes

The Paladin as Fighter

Statistics

Special Paladin Benefits

Paladin Constraints

The Ranger

The Ranger as Fighter

Statistics

Special Ranger Benefits

Surprise

Level Damage Bonus

Tracking

Abilities Unlocked by Level

Ranger Constraints

The Thief

Choosing Stats

Thieves' Weapons and Armour

Dexterity

Thieving Abilities

Picking Pockets

Open Locks

Find/Remove Traps

Navigation menu

Search