Usually, I've dumped a drink into it or something, ruining the damn thing before it gets this bad, but I've been lucky... so the abuse of my fingers has had the opportunity to wear the keys away and, I think in some places, I've actually split the surface of the key plastic. Not sure what those grooves in the 'c', 'n', 'm', and comma keys mean. I just know they weren't there when I bought the keyboard. Oh, and the bit of duct tape is so I can find the 'i' key when I want italics.
The effect is entirely a combination of how much I type and how hard I type. I learned on a manual typewriter 50 years ago and I've never quite learned how to soften my keystrokes. Anyway, to continue:
Clerics:
1st Level:
Cure Light Wounds: During the course of one full turn this spell will remove hits from a wounded character (including elves, dwarves, etc.). A die is rolled, one pip added, and the resultant total subtracted from the hit points the character has taken. Thus from 2-7 hit points of damage can be removed.
Every time something odd comes up related to the casting itself, I have to stop and wonder: why specifically is the "cure light wounds" spell designated as requiring one full turn (and do they really mean ten minutes?) to achieve the result. Since none of the other spells, so far, specify how long they take to manifest the magic, it would seem to suggest less than one full turn... which of course causes any player with a brain to immediately ask, if continual light doesn't take a full turn to cast, how much time do I have in that turn to do something else? Either every other spell requires no measurable time to cast, or the one time that casting time is actually imposed actually dictates the casting time for every other spell. Otherwise, our third option is that all the casting times differ according to the DM's whim... and I'd like to be the first to say that doesn't work for me.
Once again this language, "remove hits." Why "remove damage" and not "restore hit points"? What is the point to having "hit points" as a term if we're not going to use it? It makes far more sense for the spell to "increase" points rather than "remove," since the latter is clearly a double negative construction: damage removes hit points and then the spell removes damage. It's just bad writing.
Of course, we're all used to it now, having been inculcated into the D&D cult for as long as we have, but looked at from the point of view of a 1975 buyer of the product, it's a head scratcher.
And we've said this before, too: a "pip" is a physical indentation in the die. To "add" a pip, accurately according the language, I'd need a point-chisel and a hammer to literally pound a divit into the die, whereupon it would be permanently there. That is NOT what's wanted and is not the correct language for this instruction. In English, when we add something to a number, say a "5" indicated on a die, we add another number, in this case the number "one" to the die, not a "pip." ffs.
There are only 54 words in this passage and there are so many grammatical errors in it that a grade two teacher, getting this, would worry about the student cognitive skills.
Too, it creates an issue that has been endlessly debated, and that issue is right there on the tin. I have been part of endless debates as to what "hit points" really are. Here, it stipulates the answer plainly. A point of damage is a "wound." The spell heals "wounds." Taken literally, it means a hit point, even a single hit point, is not "exhaustion," not "erosion of will" or a reduction in the combatant's grit, not "luck," not "morale"... it's a physical cutting of the skin or a physical trauma of some kind caused beneath the skin which create bruising, which is the suffusion of blood into a part of the body. That begs the question, when the character increases in levels and has MORE hit points, are the commensurate wounds smaller, or does the character actually increase the number of wounds they can sustain without dying — which really makes no sense at all where combatants are concerned. Yet the text clearly states that we're expected to square the exponential growth of hit points across levels as literal injuries.
Also, since the language is that "hits" are removed, are we to believe that each and every hit point caused is a separate hit? That if I do "8" damage to an orc, I'm actually hitting it eight times for eight separate hits?
This nuttiness makes my head hurt.
Purify Food & Water: This spell will make spoiled or poisoned food and water usable. The quantity subject to a single spell is approximately that which would serve a dozen people.
Obviously, this isn't going to get better. The spell says the water is "purified," yet the text says the food and water is "usable." That latter extends to nearly the whole of history in which human beings regularly "used" food and water for forty plus years that was anything but "pure." But never mind, words don't mean what words mean, so fuck it, usable, full of parasites and bacteria, slightly tainted with fungal toxins, still has trace mercury in it, counts as "purified."
And why did the writer have to use the verb "serve." A glass of water can "serve" a hundred people, feasibly. A "serving" is not a measurement. I assume we're trying to say, "will provide enough water to sustain a dozen people for a day. Presumably, NOT forever. But the spell doesn't SAY that. It actually SAYS nothing of real value. For all the spell says, the spell purifies enough food and water to serve a dozen people forever. And if I choose to interpret the spell as written that way, point out please where I'm wrong.
It's a bit annoying because the spell has absolutely no value where a wargame combat is concerned. A lot of the spells here have been excusable on some level because it was designed to ford a blue line drawn on a battle map, but this spell has no logical value within that sort of event. The only value this spell has is in an ongoing campaign... and for that, as a game rule, it fails disasterously.
Detect Magic: This spell is the same as that for Magic-Users.
Maybe a page number for where the spell occurs? It's the least the writer could do. The book's spell list isn't even alphabetical. It appears on page 23 and I wrote about it here.
Detect Evil: This spell is the same as that for Magic-Users except that it has a duration of 6 turns and a range of 12".
The spell listed on page 24 has a duration of 2 turns and a range of 6" for the mage. I wrote about it here.
Protection from Evil: This spell is the same as that for Magic-Users except that it lasts for 12 turns.
This spell is also listed on page 23 and has a duration of 6 turns for the mage. I wrote about it here.
Light: This spell is the same as that for Magic-Users, except that it has a basic duration of 12 turns.
This spell is again listed on page 23, where although it has a base duration of 6 turns for the mage, this adds the number of levels per the user, which the cleric version does not do. Thus a 6th level mage's version lasts as long as the cleric's, while a 7th level lasts a turn longer and so on. I wrote about the spell here.
2nd Level:
Find Traps: By means of this spell the Cleric will locate any mechanical or magical traps within a radius of 3". The spell lasts 2 turns.
As opposed to some other class casting this spell. Is a pit "mechanical"? It has no gears, springs or moving parts. What about a sinkhole, or a rockfall set up by stacking loose stones atop a ledge, waiting for a vibration to set them to fall? What about a wasp's nest set under a stuck door in a shed or a house atop a porch? The door doesn't in fact set off the "trap," it just aggravates the wasps if kicked open or banged upon. What about a board laid over dirt, which is actually quicksand that's wider than the board? Is that "mechanical?"
Since we're not defining "traps," either, I'd like to know how extensive that is. "Trap" is an Old English word for a "contrivance for catching unawares," which includes those that are used for taking game or other animals. A "contrivance" need not be "mechanical," it just apparently means "made" for the purpose. That still leaves out the wasps if they happen to have nested there and weren't in fact placed under the door.
The etymology further extends to the German trappe, treppe, which means "step, stair," from which English gets "tread"... which arguably means that a trap includes anything that is tread upon... this is supported by the Spanish trampa, whic also means a "trap, pit or snare." It's not a definite straight line, so it really depends on what we want to include.
In short, there's no answer... but for me personally, as a game tool given to the cleric with purpose, it ought to detect any non-sentient physical anomaly capable of causing harm to the passerby. That covers everything, including if the wasps just happened to have settled there. The spell doesn't detect the wasps, which although non-intelligent count as "sentient," (they have nervous system, very unlike ours), but the nest is non-sentient and can be therefore detected as a threat. Arguably, from in-setting logic, the spell ought to exist to protect the cleric, specifically on behalf of the cleric's deity or pantheon, which wouldn't quibble over whether or not the "trap" was engineered, incidental, natural or environmental.
Yet this conclusion is nowhere near what the spell says. The spell depends on a trap being whatever the DM says is one. And DMs are not to be trusted.
Hold Person: This spell is the same as that for Magic-Users except that its duration is 9 turns and its range 18".
This spell is listed on page 25 and for the mage has a duration of 6 turns + the mage's level, plus a range of 12". Since the mage has to be 5th level to obtain the spell, the turn "increase" for the cleric is necessarily less two turns than the mage's minimum, but the range is better. I wrote about it here.
Bless: During any turn the prospective recipients of a Bless spell are not in combat the Cleric may give them this benison. A blessing raises morale by +1 and also adds +1 to attack dice. The spell lasts six turns.
Hm. I had to look up the word "benison." Means "benediction." It's not often a 7-letter word gets past me.
Let's see. No range, no maximum number of beneficiaries. Excellent. I cast "bless" and affect every person on the planet not now in combat. Regardless, I might add, of religious belief. Oh, what the heck. I might as well include every being on every plane of existence, while I'm at it. Why shouldn't the flies and the creatures that crawl not also enjoy my beneficence? Please assume that henceforth, when my cleric casts the spell, this is what I'm want.
Too, we should point out that the words defining the spell do not designate the duration as lasting 6 turns, but that the spell does. In a ruleset where so many other spells go out of their way to specify "duration: X turns" with the effect implied, the choice to state that the spell, rather than the blessing, has duration is a genuine ambiguity. I'm not sure this doesn't mean that it while it takes six turns for me to cast this puppy, it doesn't in fact last until the end of time. I prefer to read it that way, myself.
Speak with Animals: This spell allows the Cleric to speak with any form of animal life, understanding what they say in reply. There is a possibility that the animal(s) spoken with will perform services for the Cleric, and they will never attack the party the Cleric is with. (The manner of handling the probabilities of action by animals is discussed in the next volume). Duration: 6 turns. Range: 3".
As I coax my headache...
"Animal life" is a pretty big, um, phylum, and hardly limited to Dr. Doolittle's repertoire. It's interesting to note that the book, The Story of Dr. Doolittle by Hugh Lofting in 1920, was something of a children's phenomenon throughout the 1940s, 50s and 60s. The 1967 movie with Rex Harrison, upon which a thousand youtubers have cast aspersions as a "bomb," wasn't actually one... in fact, it was extremely popular and made a lot of money at the box office. It was only that it's high production and marketing costs ended in bankrupting the project. Nevertheless, the film itself remained a phenomenon throughout the 1970s, appearing constantly as a "family movie" event every year.
I bring this up because the spell bears the marks of the concept. These fellows would all have known about the story, they'd have likely read it or had it read to them when they were growing up... and in the culture, any reference to "talking with the animals" would immediately evoke the character. Only, the animals "performed services" for Dr. Doolittle strictly because he was an English Gentleman of the highest possible character, never did anything untoward to anyone, and absolutely never took advantage of an animal in his care (as he was an animal doctor, besides). The idea that animals might do so for a bunch of murder-hobos in a medieval setting is highly doubtful... but unfortunately, the actual mechanics of this spell have been kicked down the road to the next volume, so we must leave of it for now and redress the problems created (for it's almost certain there will be problems) at that time.
3rd level:
Remove Curse: This spell is the same as that for Magic-Users.
The spell is listed on page 26, where it is a 4th level mage spell. I wrote about it here.
Cure Disease: A spell which cures any form of disease. The spell is the only method to rid a character of a disease from a curse, for example.
The spell is fine. It says "a character," so we might reasonably assume that's the spell's limit. Actually stating as much would have been better.
"Disease" in the whole White Box occurs when a mummy touches, when a lycanthrope does a little more than that, when a green slime needs getting rid of and as a curse resulting from a scroll. There don't seem to be any rules for the occurrence of ordinary, boring diseases within the game system.
Locate Object: This spell is the same as that for Magic-Users, except that the base range is 9".
This spell is listed on page 24, where it has a range of 6" + 1" per level of the mage. Because it's a 2nd level spell, the minimum range for a mage with the spell is also 9". I wrote about the spell here.
Continual Light: This spell is the same as that for Magic-Users, except that the light shed is equal to full daylight.
The spell is listed on page 25. No rules of any kind that I know of as yet explain the difference between "not equal to full daylight" (the mage version) and "full daylight" (above), except we may reasonably surmise these are not in fact the same thing. It's possible that goblins and orcs in the game, which when subjected to "full daylight," suffer a -1 from their attack and morale dice, but this isn't as precise as it sounds, since "daylight" can be anything from a cloudless sunny day to the dim of an afternoon thunderstorm. "Daylight" isn't a measurement. I wrote about the spell here.
4th Level:
Neutralize Poison: A spell to counter the harmful effects of poison. Note that it will not aid a character killed by poison, however. It will affect only one object. Duration: 1 turn.
"Object"? The affected person isn't one, nor is the poison. Are we referring the vial in which the poison was kept?
"Poison" in the whole White Box includes something gotten from medusae, wyverns, yellow mold, living statues, the potion that shouldn't have been drunk, and strong boxes or chests with poison needles. There are no rules for eating poison berries or making poison, or adding poison to someone's food or any other reference whatsoever to poison.
Presumably, if a character is killed by poison, while the spell won't aid that character, it will still neutralise the poison, right? Perhaps the "object" reference refers to potions, which would suggest the poison can be neutralised before it's injected into the victim. That's important, if one can affect the poison glands of medusa, wyverns or whatever living statues are covered with. None of this is stated, of course, so we're left with wondering if the only use of this spell is to automatically cast it on every chest encountered.
I remember early games with some DMs who bought hard into this metric where every bloody chest we encountered was so trapped. It got to be a running gag. The correct way to open a chest, according the "Helpful Adventurer's Guide," is to cover the top with a thick blanket, gently roll the chest until it's upside down, then smash into the chest's bottom with an axe.
Cure Serious Wounds: This spell is like a Light Wound spell, but the effects are double, so two dice are rolled and one pip is added to each die. Therefore, from 4 to 14 hit points will be removed by this spell.
See cure light wounds, above. The language here is just as silly, while the amount of hit points bestowed by the spell, for a 4th level spell, is laughable. The fact that a "2" can be rolled for a first level spell is bad enough, but the possibility, 1 in 36, that a character of 7th level achieves a healing of only 4 h.p. on a given day, and only 9 h.p. on average, not even enough to fully heal a 1st level fighter, is a bloody embarrassment as regards game design. It's four times the spell level, it should be at least 4d6+4. And even that, honestly, would be too little.
I need to catch my breath. There are 11 spells left to write.
No comments:
Post a Comment