Saturday Q&A (apr 6)

Nigel in Hamburg writes,

We’re playing a small group with two monks, both with high (16+) Dex, with pretty much unchanged 1st Ed PHB rules for attacks with two weapons. The question came up as to whether a first level monk could have multiple attacks, using the ‘off hand’ (or ‘off foot’) as a second ‘weapon’. If/when it gets that far, I intend that the additional attacks that come with higher level will not suffer the second weapon penalty.

I couldn’t see any reasons why not. Have you come across this or considered this before?

The further question came up of then combining open hand attacks with weapons. Again, I have don’t see a problem with this, as long as the weapon is light, which means for us club, hand-axe, dagger, hammer, short sword, open hand.

Answer: These are my rules for attacking with two weapons. There is a clear reference to using a fist as a secondary weapon, so that makes the monk's open hand an inherent option. The fist is the offhand weapon because it's lighter. My sage abilities include options for using the feet as an attack rather than the open hand, though at present those are not written out, only referenced, because I have no characters with those specific abilities at this time.

I've been using these detailed two weapon rules for about 10 or 12 years now. I've used the players handbook rules since starting as a dungeon master. Apparently, we're thinking alike along these lines.

 

Chris writes,

We DMs of the lamb lot — innocent creatives, if you will — desire a page of opposition to those rascals who have such derringdo and hidden plans.

Ah, but you are prepared: tables composed in solitude, rules memorized as deity with double dozen spell slots, and historical mien to lawyer inconsistencies.

I think it is good for a DM to have at least some of those enterprising players. A group of them, conniving outside the world, to plot what chaos to bring into the fantastic one. I think it is maybe rare, even among friends, but the idea — you didn't have personal details in this one — could only have come out of the perfect symphony of a single mind, no?

Or we could encourage the players in session zero and one to think of things to do. They would need to make sure to mark down their rations or other consumables. Find lodging or keep traveling. Encounter some tussle with corrupt lawfolk, maybe.

Answer: Do players with too much "derringdo and hidden plans" upset the apple cart, as it were? Yes, they do. But if the world is seen in the right light by the DM, it doesn't matter.

If the players have a habit of murdering the wizened old man whose going to deliver all the pertinent exposition about the adventure, then we can always say, "If you can't play the game like serious adults, the door is over there." If the player rules lawyer starts to take up too much of our time, we don't need to win the argument, we can always say, "If you don't like the rules of this campaign, the door is over there." And if they connive together to create chaos, chaos has its consequences, doesn't it? Too much chaos is a bad thing for players; what's desired is controlled chaos, not a remapping of The Purge, right?

I think as a DM we can invent rational, reasonable things to happen to grab the players attention better than just making sure they eat, sleep and avoid tussles with the law. A few well-placed victims or bad guys, intruding on the players' comfort, is more than enough to get them to decide whether or not to get involved, if they haven't some idea of their own. The point is to make sure they understand we're not going to go out of our way building a whole structured adventure for them, unless we want. It's not actually our responsibility. But then, I have the benefit of already having a party I've weaned onto my style of DMing. In this day and age, with everyone eyeballs deep in the jargon, it might be a little harder to get a party to realise that they can just "do for themselves." That's sure to take a bit of practice for them.

Regarding the perfect symphony of a single mind, sure enough. I was definitely the idea-source for the parties I ran with. I would take my fellow players aside, away from the DM and propose what they ought to say or how they ought to act, and why this would be great for them and for us. And naturally, I would set it up so my fellow party members succeeded in picking up a magic items or some other bit of bling, which I could have stepped in and gotten for myself, but I enjoyed being the ringmaster. Part of being a ringmaster includes keeping one's fellow players motivated in following directions.

_____

Sorry about the lateness of this post.  I forgot it was Saturday.  How irresponsible of me.

Thank you for your contributions.  If readers would like to reply to the above, or wish to ask a question or submit observations like those above, please submit  to my email, alexiss1@telus.net.  If you could, please give the region where you're located (state, province, department, county, whatever) as it humanises your comment.

Feel free to address material on the authentic wiki, my books or any subject related to dungeons & dragons.  I encourage you to initiate subject material of your own, and to address your comment to others writing in this space.    

Patreon:  https://www.patreon.com/user?u=3015466.