Helmets Shall be Split in Twain!

Despite a rather busy holiday season so far, I have been keeping both of my main gaming groups going: the Skype-based "home" Labyrinth Lord campaign, and the campaign I run out of  Lift Bridge Books, the local book shop.

The latter group just met yesterday and continued its adventures marauding around in a parallel dimension dominated, on the one hand, by the vast, human-dominated city of Vornheim and, on the other, by a sinister Citadel commanded by a society of Dark Elves.* That gaming group is really picking up steam despite some wavering attendance over the holidays: yesterday our two regular core attendees were there plus two others, making a total of four players plus me.

A photo from a late November meeting of the Lift Bridge Old-School D&D Group.

During the session, one player made a pitch for an extension of the "Shields Shall Be Splintered!" rule, i.e., the "Helmets Shall be Split in Twain!" rule. It would work the same way as the Shields variant, but with only a 2 in 6 chance of working when invoked:

Upon a successful 2 in 6 roll, a helmet may be used to "soak" damage from a single attack, thereby reducing damage to zero. Soaking damage destroys the helmet; it is split in two.


--
* Once the group entered this dimension -- by opening a magical trunk in the underground lair of Zappo the Mysterious -- I had my first chance to use Vornheim, Zak S.'s fucking excellent city gaming supplement. (plans for a review in the near future). For the alternate dimension's Drow-inhabited lands I am mostly cherry-picking stuff from D3 Vault of the Drow.

Dissociated Mechanics and House Rules

I have recently been looking over some archive posts at The Alexandrian, and am most grateful for Justin Alexander's super-smart Primer on Dissociated Mechanics. I highly recommend that post to my readers.

The post sheds light on the underlying reason why D&D 4e didn't really work for me: because as a "method actor" type who loves immersive role-playing, I really cannot bear obtrusive dissociated mechanics. This preference is evident in the primary house rule I impose upon my Labyrinth Lord games: multiple round searching for secret doors. The arbitrary (to me) rule in LL as writ saying that each PC can only search each area once is a dissociated mechanic -- it just doesn't make sense within the role-playing world. It may exist for some very good metagame reason that I don't understand, but it is impossible to justify within the game world, and thus does not support good roleplaying.

In this sense, the "only search each area once" rule in LL-as-writ is quite similar to "healing surges" and "daily powers" in D&D 4e. I have written at length about why 4e doesn't feel right to me, and recently stated at the end of this post that, like Jeff Rients, I do not care at all for healing surges. I noted that this dislike was because these surges make it hard to kill PCs, and indeed, this is partially true. (It's not that I'm out to kill PCs -- in fact, if anything, I am the opposite of a "killer DM" -- but it is just that I want there to be something palpably at stake, I want there to be real danger and threat in the game so that players are forced to play cleverly to secure their own survival.)

But the REAL (or more fundamental) reason I despise healing surges is that they just don't make sense within the roleplaying universe. They represent a dissociated mechanic, unconnected to the character or the game world. So again, thanks to Justin Alexander for making the specific root cause of my system preferences much clearer to me.

The Assassination Decree

I have discussed this subject before, but wanted to formalize this policy for my Arandish Campaign:

Assassination (see Advanced Edition Companion p. 10) only works in the context of a planned, premeditated assassination attempt, NOT in the middle of standard melee combat -- unless that melee combat is being staged for the purpose of committing the assassination. In other words, "Assassination" does NOT equal "backstab followed by chance of instant death" unless it is as part of a premeditated Assassination attempt. This houseruling may limit how this ability works vis-a-vis the wording in the AEC, but that's how things are in Ara.

"File yer complains with me, filthy human scum!"

Brockport LL Campaign House Rules

As I mentioned the other day, I am starting a new local Labyrinth Lord campaign here in my home village of Brockport.  I hereby dub this enterprise, to be commenced today (six hours hence), The Brockport Campaign.  This campaign's name refers to the physical locale of the game sessions in the "real" world, as well as the in-game port city from which the PCs hail.  Those PCs have ventured many months' travel west of the prosperous sea port, to find themselves lost in a vast desert. . . .

One ancillary benefit of naming the new game the Brockport Campaign is that the names of my three active campaigns follow an easy-to-memorize A - B - C pattern:

A = Arandish Campaign (commenced 1/18/2010 in Eugene, OR, now plays over Skype)

B = Brockport Campaign (commences 12/4/2011, plays live in Brockport, NY)

C = ConstantCon, Tales From The Hotel Kaladarian (plays in HELL)

At any rate, here are the House Rules I plan* to use for the Brockport Campaign:

Brockport Labyrinth Lord Campaign House Rules

Our campaign shall obey the Labyrinth Lord Core Rules plus:

Shields Shall Be Splintered!
Shields provide the usual +1 bonus to AC. However, they may also be used to "soak" damage from a single attack, thereby reducing damage to zero. Soaking damage destroys the shield.

Shields may also be used against any attack that allows a save for half damage, such as a fireball or dragon's breath. In that case, the shield is destroyed, as above, and the save is considered automatically successful, thereby guaranteeing half damage.

For magical shields, each +1 enchantment bonus gives a 10% chance of surviving a damage soak.

Multiple-Turn Searching for Secret Doors Allowed
This deviates from the "one try only" rule as printed in LL p. 45.

Critical Hits and Fumbles
Any time a player rolls a natural ‘20’ on a to hit roll, it is a critical hit. Damage is doubled.

Likewise, if a player rolls a natural ‘1’ on a to hit roll, it is considered a critical failure or fumble. Typically, this means the combatant hurts himself, drops his weapon, breaks his weapon, or just plain falls down – Labyrinth Lord's discretion.

[EDIT: I removed "The D30 Rule."]


--
* Note: I anticipate having some veteran players onboard -- I know at least two of my probable attendees have played D&D 3.5 and/or D&D IV at any rate -- so plan to spend a wee bit of time at the top of the first session discussing these house rules and making sure nobody has any strong objections or intriguing suggestions.  For myself, I am really hoping to stick to Race-As-Class and 3d6 in order, for part of my mission here is to introduce these folks to the mechanics and feel of old-school play.  I want the whole thing to be as Moldvay-ish as possible.  So I will resist adding AEC classes as best I can; but I do not want to ruin anybody else's good time either, so we'll see what happens.  I am easily negotiated with.

Alignment By Raggi (and Goodman)

Alignment in D&D has always somewhat vexed me. It is a concept I am still (after all these years) trying to make sense out of / make peace with.

Dedicated as I am to learning the Old Ways, I am really determined to try to come to grips with an exciting, generative interpretation of the "alignment" concept in D&D, specifically using the standard OD&D / Labyrinth Lord / B/X Threefold Alignment System, i.e., Law - Neutrality - Chaos only.

[Those interested in my prior statements / musings on this issue may consult this post on alignment languages in Ara, as well as my previous "State of the Union" on Arandish Campaign Alignment found here.]

As it happens, I was just discussing this very topic with Spawn of Endra last weekend. He and I were talking about what his character, Innominus, a Lawfully aligned Cleric, would do (or would feel most compelled to do) with the Chaotically aligned sword the party filched off the defeated Hobgoblin General back in Session 26 of our campaign. [We never quite answered that question.]

One thing I feel strongly is that each god or deity in Ara should be unique, and may have specific idiosyncrasies that do not quite "align" with the Threefold Alignment System. That is, gods and extraplanar beings may not necessarily have alignments.

That said, I DO want Law and Chaos to be palpable forces engaged in an ancient, cosmic battle in the "big picture" of my Lands of Ara campaign setting. This is not a specific idea that has existed in Ara prior to its current Labyrinth Lord-based iteration, but I am now looking for ways to integrate a big-picture conflict between two opposed cosmic principles into the game-world. Perhaps in time I will come up with specific names for these two opposed forces -- something like Ara (Law) vs. The Demon Plane (Chaos) -- but for now I want to puzzle it out using the game's default terms, Law - Neutrality - Chaos.

Enter James Raggi's LotFP Grindhouse Edition and its take on alignment, found on pp. 21-22 of the Rules and Magic book. Both Spawn and I took a look at that section during our talk last weekend, and lo! leave it to Raggi to cut through the bullshit and issue a concise, clear definition of how alignment can work in D&D:

"Alignment is a character's orientation on a cosmic scale. It has nothing to do with a character's allegiances, personality, morality, or actions. Alignments will mostly be used to determine how a character is affected by certain magical elements in the game."

I like that -- it is cosmic and "macro" rather than nitpicky and "micro." Raggi describes each alignment category as follows:

"Lawful: The universe has an ultimate, irrefutable truth, and a flawless, unchanging plan towards which all events inevitably march. As time moves on, all distraction and resistance to this plan falters until everything is in its perfect state forevermore, without alteration or the possibility of possibilities. Those who are Lawful in alignment are part of an inevitable destiny, but have no knowledge of what that destiny is and what their role will be in fulfilling it. So they are forever look for signs and omens to show them their proper way.

"Chaotic: The howling maelstrom beyond the veil of shadows and existence is the source of all magic. It bends and tears the fabric of the universe; it destroys all that seeks to be permanent. It allows great miracles as reality alters at the whim of those that can call the eldritch forces, and it causes great catastrophe as beings we call demons (and far, far worse) rip into our reality and lay waste to all. Everything that is made will be unmade. Nothing exists, and nothing can ever exist, not in a way that the cosmos can ever recognize. Those who are Chaotic in alignment are touched by magic, and consider the world in terms of ebbing and flowing energy, of eternal tides washing away the sand castles that great kings and mighty gods build for themselves. Many mortals who are so aligned desperately wish they were not.

"Neutral: To be Neutral is merely to exist between the forces of Law and Chaos. Mortal beings exist as Neutral creatures, and remain so throughout their existence unless taking specific steps (often unwittingly) to align themselves otherwise. In fact, most beings would be rather displeased with the notion of pure Law and Chaos, as they are defined in alignment terms. Even most who would claim allegiance to Law or Chaos are not actually Lawful or Chaotic. In the real world, every human being that has ever existed has been Neutral."

And lastly, Raggi's most provocative (and useful) declaration:

Clerics must be Lawful. Elves and Magic-Users must be Chaotic. All others are free to choose their alignment.

I hereby hork Raggi's notion that all clerics are Lawful, and that all magic-users and elves are Chaotic. Clerics follow the metaphysical "laws" of Ara, paying fealty to the gods. Magic-users and arcanists are messing with the "howling maelstrom beyond the veil of shadows and existence" that is Chaos.

As it happens, this ruling fits in beautifully with the history of arcane magic use on Ara, particularly its descent into "chaos" during the Old War.

And a postscript by Joseph Goodman [from an unrelated rpg geek thread] that really sums things up nicely:

Law is an alignment with Man; Chaos is an alignment with supernatural (or supra-mortal) powers. That frequently turns into a "good vs. evil" conversation because the supernatural powers aren't always acting in mankind's best interest! But it's not always the case.

Indeed! I think this captures the vibe I'm after quite nicely.

Random Wilderness Events

Note: MY CURRENT PLAYERS SHOULD AVOID DOWNLOADING OR READING THE "WILDERNESS ENCOUNTER TABLE" PDF MENTIONED AT SEVERAL POINTS DURING THIS POST. That pdf contains possible spoilers about what's going on in the Minochian Mountains in our current campaign timeline. Aside from that pdf, however, I have kept the rest of this post spoiler-free, so please read on and enjoy!

Generating Random Wilderness Events
In my latest session report, I mentioned a technique I have been using in my Labyrinth Lord games to generate random wilderness events. There are two methods I have used in order to randomly determine whether or not a natural event occurs during wilderness travel:

1. The "Customize the Encounter Table" Method
If you download the Minochian Mountains Encounter Table pdf, you will see that I embedded "natural event" results into the table itself. In this case, it is a d30 table, and a roll of 29 on the d30 results in a natural event rather than a monster. To determine which specific natural event occurs, simply make an additional roll on the "Natural Events Sub-Table" (see below).

This approach could be adapted for use with stock Wilderness Encounter Tables as well: simply choose one monster off the list (BEFORE rolling on the table) to swap out for the "Roll on Natural Event Sub-Table" result. For example, if I were using the "Grassland" Wilderness Monster Encounter Table on page 105 of Labyrinth Lord, I could pre-designate the "Boar" result (a roll of 3 on the d20) as my "Roll on Natural Event Sub-Table" outcome. Every time I rolled a wandering monster encounter, there would be a 1 in 20 chance of the "monster" actually being a natural event.

2. The "Extra 1 in 6 Chance" Method
As a DM I am always on the lookout for another excuse to roll d6s. There is something really satisfying for me about the "x in 6 chance" event outcome mechanic (a fact which bodes well for my interest in one day playing LotFP: WFRP, since its "skill system" is based on this very mechanic).

In the comments to that most recent session report, I mentioned that I was using the straight-up Labyrinth Lord Wilderness Encounter Tables during Session 36. The reason for this is because the custom Minochian Mountains Encounter Table mentioned above is really only appropriate for use in southern Minoch near Stonehell; for the PC's recent adventure on Blackstone Mountain in Northern Minoch, I instead used the "Mountains/Hills" Random Encounter Table on p. 105 of the LL Rulebook. But in this case I did not want to simply substitute the "Wilderness Event" result into the d20 table; I desired an even greater likelihood of a Wilderness Event on these particularly treacherous slopes! So I implemented the "Extra 1 in 6 Chance" Method.

For this method, once I have determined that a wandering monster encounter is going to take place, I impose an extra 1 in 6 chance that rather than a wandering monster, we are instead dealing with a "natural event" type encounter. Then, as usual, I use my own Wilderness Events Sub-Table (from the aforementioned pdf) to determine which specific natural event occurs.

This second method increases the chance of dangerous natural occurrences by a decent margin, but so much the better. Natural occurrences with potentially harsh outcomes make for exciting wilderness travel!

[You can read about the deadliness of my group's latest such event, a rockslide, in the Session 36 Report and DM Notes.]

The "Extra 1 in 6 Chance" Method also allows for DMs even more trigger-happy than I am to further increase the chance for a Natural Event by imposing a 2 in 6 or even a 3 in 6 chance for such an outcome after a random encounter has been indicated. I could see myself using such a tactic in a particularly seismically unstable region, for example.

Using Random Wilderness Events Sub-Tables
Since my party has been traveling in a mountainous region for the bulk of the adventure campaign so far, the Wilderness Events Sub-Table (see this pdf) I've been using since around Session 31 includes such occurrences as "Steam Geyser," "Avalanche," "Flood," "Earthquake," "Forest Fire," and even "Weird Mana Emanation" (see the pdf for full descriptions of these events).

Some suggested events for other types of wilderness regions might include:

Desert: sandstorm, drought, quicksand, flash flood, mirage

Forest/Wooded: forest fire, rainstorm, hailstorm, flood, beaver invasion, treant insurrection

Grassland: tornado, thunderstorm, insect swarm, Blood Grass

Jungle: quicksand, flood, insect swarm, tropical rainstorm, snake plague

Rivers/Lakes: current too strong, frozen, boiling

Sea: storm, whirlpool / typhoon, dead winds, seas part for a religious zealot, Ponaturi insurrection

Swamp: rainstorm, flood, drought, insect swarm, marsh gasses spontaneously explode, crocodile plague

Note that I always sneak one "wacky" or quasi-supernatural result in with the more realistic ones. That's just how I roll. Obviously, individual DMs could make their own custom Natural Event Sub-Tables for each region in their own campaign world(s).

[Thanks to The Jovial Priest for urging me to write this up.]

Horse Movement Rates - The Most Significant Post On the Topic EVER.

[The Spawn of Endra returns from the wilderness of Belize:]

A few weeks back there was the episode where Blogger ate a bunch of blogs, there was rending of garments and gnashing of teeth, and then things got back on track. All that this blog lost (I believe) was a post on Horse Movement Rates that I had struggled to write over a couple of days. A few comments I got suggested the rates were way off, the horses would be dead if you rode them that hard, etc. I'll attempt to reproduce the main arguments here in brief, mostly because there are issues in translating the per round or per turn movement rates for horses to wilderness rates in B/X and Lab Lord. And also because Jovial Priest has been politely badgering the hell out of me to repost this.

So the highlights:
Horses and mules are hell of slow by the rules. One with a cart can only move at 60'/turn or 6'/min or 1' in 10 seconds (LL p.17). I had a joke about having your ass in a sling:

And if my horse moved that slow I'd give it this treatment:

Okay, having recapitulated the yuks, here's my take. I suggest that the B/X per-turn rates are useless, but also so rarely used we don't need to think about them as a basis for daily movement rates except in a sort of relative way (e.g., horses are faster than donkeys, riding horses are faster than draft horses, unencumbered horses are faster than encumbered ones, etc.). I have looked at some info that probably represents extremes of horse ability here, though in his original comments JD Jarvis had suggested that the rates here on the same website are a better guide. I leave it to you, kind reader, to sort this out according to your best judgment.

The main details:

1) The speeds for a Riding Horse are probably okay.

2) War Horses, if we use early 20th C. US cavalry races as a benchmark, ~60mi/day is probably reasonable for an unencumbered horse (just a rider).

3) Mizarian Draft Horses are as equally awesome as a generic Arandish War Horse.

4) Any Horse should move faster than a human on foot under usual circumstances. For simplicity, though, we'll say they have an equal rate of movement.

5) Riding Horses and War Horses, per se, never pull loads.

and, the final simplifying conversion:

6) Draft Horses move at -1/3 the rate while pulling a load compared to the same conditions not pulling a load. (This might be modified with load thresholds for multiple horses, etc.)

 

This is our working house rule for now, as unrealistic as this may be. I'm happy to have more comments on this, particularly if they can help to improve this. In general I'm more interested in having a system that is consistent even if not realistic than to get bogged down in trying to accurately model an aspect of adventure mechanics that is, frankly, pretty boring.

Arandish Campaign Class Options 2011

The last time I did an Available Classes Update way back in December 2009 (!), the Advanced Edition Companion wasn't published yet, nor had I discovered Dyson Logos' brilliant 2d6 Thievery.  Furthermore, it had not crossed my mind at that early (pre-actual game play) stage that one of my players would want to be a Bard, so I then listed "Bard" as an unavailable class.  I also totally excluded halflings, which I now allow in the Arandish campaign, though I prefer to call them "hobbits."

So to bring things up to date, here is a rundown of Arandish Campaign Available Classes:

Human Class Options
Fighter, Cleric, Magic-User, Thief: as per Labyrinth Lord.  Note that Thieves use 2d6 Thievery rather than the d% skill table in LL.

Druid, Illusionist, Assassin: as per the Advanced Edition Companion.   Note that the druid is an extremely rare PC type in Ara, since Arandish Druids tend to live reclusively in the wilds, eschewing civilization and human company.

Bard:  Uses the Arandish Bard template (adapted from Brave Halfling's Delving Deeper: Bard) utilizing the 2d6 Bardery skill mechanic.  See Complete 2d6 Bardery (available as pdf here) for details.  Also note the Jongleur variant.

Ranger: The Arandish Ranger comes in two variants, both found in Brave Halfling’s Delving Deeper: Ranger.  (1) the Giant-fighter type ("With Damage Bonus"), presumed to be a northerner or from the eastern mountains, and (2) the Scout type ("With Additional Skills") from anywhere in Ara but especially prevalent in the wilderness areas of Achelon and the Western Lands, and around the Great Western Swamp.  [Coming soon: 2d6 Rangery!]

Noffellian Sword-Cleric: a special type of undead-fighting Noffellian cleric described here.

Barbarian: Barbarians are a permitted class, though are extremely rare in Ara except as Mizarians. Mizarian barbarian characters in the Lands of Ara follow the Ode To Black Dougal Barbarian guidelines, and don't forget that all Mizarian characters are "Klingons on horseback" who get a +1 bonus to any rolls having to do with riding or handling horses.

Rodian
A Rodian PC may either be rolled up as a Race-as-Class "Rodian" (my preference) or in an "Advanced" variant with four possible class options: Duellist (fighter), Rogue (thief), Illusionist, or Invoker (magic-user).  See Rodians: The Reckoning for full details on Rodian PCs.

Dwarf or Halfling
"Dwarf" or "Halfling" Race-as-Class, as per Labyrinth Lord.

Goblin
James Maliszewski’s use of Goblins as PCs has inspired me to allow goblins as PCs in Ara.  But not just anywhere; probably only in the northeastern mountains, in campaigns centering on (or at least originating in) Telengard or possibly Delzar.  Of course, if Goblins exist as PCs in Ara at all, then a few certainly dwell in the Free City of Kaladar and at least one must be a member of Hokka’s crew.

Arandish NPC classes players cannot play
Enchanter, Summoner, Necromancer, Shadrachai, and Elf (Fey).

What "typical" classes does this list exclude?
NO Paladins or Monks –- these do not exist in Ara.

NO Elves as PCs -- though elves exist as an NPC race in the Lands of Ara, using the Fey Class template presented by Gavin at The City of Iron.

J for Jongleur

[Note: Any non-gamers tuning in to this series of posts are invited to consult my New Reader Introduction for some RPG-specific definitions and a general introduction to the Lands of Ara blog.]

When the current Arandish Campaign started in early 2010, one of the participants came to me during the character generation phase and asked if he could play a juggler in the game. Being the sort of DM who likes to let players run with their ideas -- my games have always benefited greatly from the creative contributions of the players -- I of course said "yes."

This player, who is a juggler in real life, showed me some ideas he'd found in the AD&D 2e Complete Bard's Handbook and explained how the abilities and skills therein jibed with his concept for the class. Based upon these discussions, he and I constructed a juggler class based upon the Delving Deeper Bard, with a couple skills borrowed from The Complete Bard's Handbook "Jongleur" and "Blade" classes. Uncle Junkal the Rodian Jongleur was born.

Note, however, that the 2d6 Jongleur presented below (and available as downloadable pdf here) does not exactly replicate how we have been running Uncle Junkal in our own campaign play. The Jongleur Bard variant I'm making available herein has been somewhat standardized, that is, power-balanced with the Arandish Bard (downloadable as pdf here). Being a prototype, Uncle Junkal is unique, a special case, a slight deviation from the typical Arandish Jongleur.

In time, once he finishes his PhD dissertation in a couple of months, I will persuade Uncle Junkal's player to write a guest post about how he came up with the juggler-as-PC concept. For now, you'll have to make do with my take on the Arandish 2d6 Jongleur for Labyrinth Lord.

The 2d6 Jongleur

for use with 2d6 Bardery by Carter Soles and Spawn of Endra

Jongleur for Labyrinth Lord concept by "Uncle Junkal"

Jongleurs are a non-magical Bard variant that specialize in juggling, sleight of hand, and other forms of small object manipulation. Jongleurs are loosely based upon the French entertainers of the same name. They are masters at manipulating small items with their hands. They can catch and juggle almost anything. They are experts at throwing small items (like knives) with great accuracy.

Requirements: CHA 15, DEX 14, STR 9, INT 12
Prime Requisite: CHA
Hit Dice: 1d6
Maximum Level: None

Jongleurs may wear leather and studded leather armor only, and may not use shields. Jongleurs can use all hurled weapons, i.e., any weapon that can be thrown (daggers, hand axes, spears), but not including bows, blowguns, or other missile weapons that are fired or shot. Otherwise, Jongleurs are restricted to the following weapons: polearm, quarterstaff, and sling. All of the weapons usable by Jongleurs can be used in their performances. For example, they can juggle daggers, pole vault with polearms, and balance with spears or quarterstaffs.

Jongleurs begin play with the standard 3d8x10 gold pieces (gp). They use the Cleric Attack Table (LL p. 60) and the Thief Saving Throw table (LL p. 55).

Jongleur Skills: In Ara, Jongleurs use the 2d6 Bardery skill system based upon Dyson Logos' 2d6 Thievery mechanic. In addition to the three standard Bard skills -- Charm Person / Monster, Legend Lore, and Read Languages / Arcane Scrolls -- Jongleurs get one additional skill, Weapons Display, plus a special ability (no skill roll required) called Multiple Object Throwing. Like standard Bards, Jongleurs only get ONE "Favored Skill" -- all other skills roll on the "Other Skills" column on the Table below.

Weapons Display
By whirling a melee or hurled weapon about his body, a Jongleur can affect the morale and courage of others. Such a display of skill, precision, and deadly grace lowers opponents' morale by 2 (but it does not require an immediate morale check) and inspires allies, giving a +1 bonus to allies' attack rolls. The display must occur for a full round without interruption. During this time, any successful attack upon the Jongleur, or failed saving throw by the Jongleur, disrupts the display.

The Weapons Display ability requires a lot of room; it cannot be done in a narrow corridor. The observer must be close enough to the Jongleur to see the display (e.g., a darkness spell negates the effect). The display has no effect upon those already engaged in close combat, as they are too busy to pay attention to the show. Also, Weapons Display works only on those who can either use weapons or have seen them used. Weapons Display may be used only once per encounter.

Multiple Object Throwing
The experienced Jongleur may throw multiple objects (including thrown weapons) per round. This ability improves with level advancement:
Level 4: throw twice per round
Level 8: throw three times per round
Level 12: throw four times per round
Level 16: throw five times per round

2d6 Jongleur Skill Chart - Roll 2d6:

Jongleur Level	Favored Skill	Other Skills
1	10+	11+
2	10+	10+
3	9+	10+
4	9+	9+
5	9+	9+
6	8+	9+
7	8+	8+
8	7+	8+
9	6+	7+
10	5+	6+
11	4+	5+
12	4+	4+
13	3+	4+
14+	3+	3+

Note that a roll of "2" always fails.

Optionally, you may grant a Jongleur his or her CHA modifier (i.e., the absolute value of the Reaction Adjustment modifier, +1 for CHA 13-17, +2 for CHA 18) to all Jongleur skill checks, including Weapons Display, Legend Lore, and Read Languages and Arcane Scrolls skill rolls.

PC Races of Ara - Updated

Much has happened since I last issued a definitive statement of the extant PC races in the Lands of Ara. Most notably:

1. There have been some recent developments concerning Arandish Ogres that came up as a result of my revisiting the original Crimson Blades of Ara rulebook chapter-by-chapter, and

2. Goblinoid Games' Advanced Edition Companion was published, thereby making certain racial types (gnomes, half-orcs) more readily accessible for Labyrinth Lord play.

Therefore I offer this updated and amended description of all the available PC Races on Ara, as well as brief mention of a significant NPC race. The information presented here replaces and supersedes this previous post on extant Arandish races.

The Nine Arandish PC Races
All of the PC races listed in the Labyrinth Lord rulebook and the Advanced Edition Companion exist in Ara, INCLUDING Halflings (this contradicts my original post on Ara's races) but EXCLUDING Elves and Half-Elves (as PCs anyway). In Ara, halflings are somewhat rare; far more common are the rat-like humanoids called Rodians, who can be played as race-as-class or have up to four "advanced" class options available to them: Rodian Duellist, Rodian Rogue, Rodian Illusionist, and Rodian Invoker (see this post for details). Furthermore, Ara sustains Goblins as PCs as well as Arandish Ogres as PCs.

Hence the complete list of Arandish PC Races includes: Human, Dwarf, Rodian, Halfling, Goblin, Ogre, Half-Ogre, Gnome, and Half-Orc.

Brief descriptions of the origins and geographical distribution of Arandish races -- where they differ from or add to descriptions given in LL or the AEC -- follow.

Humans
In Ara, humans predominate. They are found literally everywhere on Ara, and are all (except the Southern strain called Mizarians) thought to be descendants of the ancient humans of the area now known as Noffel.

Dwarves
Arandish dwarves are magically modified humans created and employed as laborers (especially miners) in the long-since-passed Old War between Telengard and Achelon. Tending to prefer underground habitation, dwarves are fairly abundant in present-day Ara, especially in the east and northeast where most of the largest mountains are found (just as rodians—see below—tend to be found in the south and southwest, near the Bay of Noffel and major seaports). Dwarves have been doing business with and living amongst humans in Ara for a long time; dwarves are well accepted in human culture, live in most major Arandish cities, and are the second-most numerous race in Ara.

Rodians
Rodians are small, ratlike humanoids who constitute the third most numerous race in the Lands of Ara. For those who prefer race-as-class, Rodians may be treated as functionally identical to halflings – that is, with all the same basic abilities and Level Progression Table as Labyrinth Lord halflings. However, in my own campaigns I permit Rodians four different class options -- Duellist, Rogue, Illusionist, and Invoker -- detailed here.

Rodians (sometimes called Suhlians, after their home island) are seafaring folk who demonstrate a distinct tendency toward sea piracy and con-artistry. They tend to be quite dexterous, and get a bonus of +1 to initiative rolls when alone or in a party composed only of rodians. They have keen coordination that grants them +1 on any missile attacks. Because they are so small, rodians have a lower armor class (-2) when attacked by creatures greater than human sized.

Rodians are excellent utilizers of urban camouflage and can hide in shadows or behind other forms of cover when in cities or underground labyrinths on a roll of 1-2 on 1d6, though they must also be silent and motionless.

Arandish Ogres and Half-Ogres
Ogres are once-human creatures who were magically transformed by Telengardian magicians into powerful fighting monsters during the Old War between Telengard and Achelon. After that disastrous war ended, these mutants found that they had very little place in human society, and most of them retreated to the mountainous and wooded areas around Telengard and northern Delzar. Ogres (especially those who have lived in the wild) tend to be feared by humans, primarily due to their great physical size and often horrible appearance.  Ogrish characters cannot practice magical arts, and are predisposed toward severe near-sightedness (that is, the inability to see at distances). For more information on Ogrish PCs, see this post.

Also note that, due to ckutalik's excellent writeup of Half-Ogres as PCs, that race is now available in Ara.

NPC Race: Elves
Elves (sometimes referred to as Aldorians) should almost never be PCs in Ara. They are extremely reclusive, living in near-perfect isolation in the Northwestern forests, and do not usually see any reason to fraternize with other races. Referees wishing to stat up Aldorian elves for NPC use should use elf23's Fey class instead of standard Labyrinth Lord Elves.

Note: A comprehensive current list of Arandish PC classes will be given in a separate post.

Alignment Languages Part 2: What To Do Next

Before digging into this, I recommend that you take a look at my previous post about why I am adding alignment languages to my group's Labyrinth Lord game, paying particular attention to the Moldvay and Gygax quotes about how alignment languages were intended to be used in B/X and AD&D.

Both the DMG and Moldvay passages imply that alignment languages are a kind of verbal and/or gestural shorthand, not really full-blown languages like racial tongues or common. I like that idea. In fact, I hereby posit that alignment languages are the fragmentary remnants of either (a) older, now-mostly-dead languages from ancient Arandish times (for Lawful and Neutral) or (b) tongues used on other planes of existence (Chaotic).

Before delineating my tentative plan for how this will work in the Lands of Ara, I first want to acknowledge (and quote from) some online resources that helped me hone my thinking on this subject.

First would be this concise but crucial post by Stuart Marshall over on the Robertson Games website, which puts forth the following rich proposition:

What I settled on was a language that was generally associated with each of the 3 alignments, but that could be learned by other characters if they so desired. However, starting characters were limited to learning the “alignment language” corresponding to their own alignment at the beginning of the game – unless their class provided them additional language options. . .

Ancient 

Lawful characters may choose to learn Ancient as a bonus language (if they have one available). Much like Latin, this is a dead language that is primarily found in ancient texts and used by clerics. 

Thieves Cant 

Neutral characters are more likely to associate with outlaws, thieves and criminals. They may choose to learn Thieves Cant as a bonus language. While not used in regular day-to-day life for honest citizens, it can be heard in back alleys and seedier taverns. 

Black Tongue 

A vile, guttural language that most people would not dare to speak. It is said that merely saying a few words in this dark language attracts the attention of demonic ears. Orcs, cultists, and dark wizards are known to speak this dread language.

Very nice! This solves the problem of tying each alignment language to some game-world organization or group, and bestowing upon alignment languages a sense of history. I also tend to favor Stuart's interpretation that alignment languages should be obtainable by other, differently aligned characters, though maybe it should be difficult to find anyone who would teach a given alignment language to an outsider.

Next are some insightful comments from an interesting post on unaligned characters by The Jovial Priest. Now, much as I admire his concept here, I do not plan on adopting it whole cloth. No, I want to keep to the standard Labyrinth Lord-B/X three-part alignment system, and I think Neutral can more or less stand in for The JP's "Unaligned" category for my purposes. So allow me to quote from that post while substituting my own amendments in brackets:

"Most sentient beings are [Neutral]. That is, they have not committed themselves to the Cosmic Battle between Law and Chaos. They may have an opinion as to which they prefer and even work toward one end, but they haven’t aligned themselves wholeheartedly. [Neutral beings] are like most of us. We do good most of the time, are fairly selfish some of the time and occasionally we do evil. These are choices we make day to day. Were there to be a god of Law or demons of Chaos, most of us would side with Law but would generally prefer not to die for the cause.

"[Lawfully or Chaotically] aligned characters are different. They actively choose to side with Law or Chaos. [. . .] Those [Lawfully or Chaotically] Aligned must actively seek as one of the primary purposes of their life to advance the cause they are aligned to." [emphasis added]

Yes! What this tells me is that the Neutral alignment language should be derived from a group and/or set of historical circumstances that has no direct investment in the ancient struggle between Law and Chaos. Stuart's proposed "Thieves Cant" could fit that bill, though I might want to make that just one possible option amongst a few. If indeed the vast majority of living beings are neutral, does it really make sense that ALL those beings would know Thieves Cant? Shouldn't Thieves Cant be limited to Thieves, Assassins, and their fences, contacts, and clients?

Another useful part of The Jovial Priest's post is the bit about the Know Alignment spell:

"How can Chaos infiltrate civilisation if Know Alignment is so easily cast? I intend to adopt 2nd edition AD&D, which I have never played, reverse version of the spell which allows the caster to hide alignment for 24 hours. I would also make Chaos have many magical items, a small broach or ring perhaps, that have this identical effect."

I like that a lot. It seems to me that the moment one accepts the full implications of alignment languages -- i.e., that there is a very real Cosmic Battle between Law and Chaos raging in the game-world -- then such alignment-cloaking measures indeed become a logical necessity.

So what position will alignment languages occupy in Ara? My initial proposal, to be tested during forthcoming game play, is this:

To Begin With: All three alignment languages are in fact ancient (for Lawful and Neutral) or extraplanar (for Chaotic) languages of which only small fragments remain in circulation.

Specifically:

(1) Lawful is derived from Old Noffellian, the ancient language of the first Arandish humans. (This is pretty much a rip-off of Stuart's "Ancient" concept.)

(2) Neutral is derived from Old Mizarian, the ancient language of the southeastern (Mizarian) strain of humanity.* Present-day Mizarian is one derivative of Old Mizarian, as is the Neutral alignment language.

The Aldorians (elves) also developed their own Neutral language, Aldorian (or Fey), in the ancient days -- the key difference being that Aldorian Neutral is actually a living language because the Aldorian Fey still speak it. Virtually no one except the Aldorians themselves would have access to this language, so when any other Arandish racial type speaks Neutral, they are speaking the Old Mizarian version.

(3) Chaotic is a simplified version of Demonic, i.e., the language spoken by Demons from the Plane of Chaos. Most likely this alignment tongue reached Ara via the activities of the early Summoners, who brought the first Demons into contact with the Arandish dimension.

Sorting out my thoughts on this issue has inspired even more ideas about how Arandish racial and magical languages might relate to each other, but I think I've said enough for now. I need to let this Alignment Language system get some road-testing in play before I start creating elaborate Arandish Language trees and the like.

Okay, okay, I can't resist giving out one last tidbit before I lay this subject (temporarily) to rest: on Ara, the oldest extant language, the one that predates ALL of the aforementioned ancient sources for the three major alignment languages, is the language of Dragons.

--
*Thanks to Carl for giving me this idea.

Alignment Languages Part 1: What Came Before

I have literally never used Alignment Languages in D&D. This is one of those concepts that my 1980s gaming compatriots and I simply ignored; I do not even recall ever discussing Alignment Languages as a concept or making conscious note of the fact that we were omitting them. We just completely disregarded the whole idea, and never looked back.

But last session (Session 30), the Arandish Labyrinth Lord campaign's newest member (who joined us two sessions ago) asked about the available languages in Ara and specifically inquired about the role of Alignment Languages in our campaign. My initial answer was that we had been ignoring them. But this led to some very productive discussion amongst the members of the group and got me to thinking about reevaluating my position on this matter.

As I have recently noted, the longer my group plays Labyrinth Lord together, the more we seem to gravitate toward playing it "as writ" -- i.e., our house rules seem to be getting fewer and fewer as we go. This is a good thing for many reasons, not least of which -- as we have poignantly learned, for example, by reverting to once-per-round 1d6 group initiative -- is that the game is actually more fun to play as written, even when some of the rules are abstract in nature and difficult to justify in "real world" terms. Going with once-per-round (rather than once-per-battle) group initiative has livened up combat a great deal since we made that switch a few sessions ago. Could incorporating Alignment Languages have an enlivening and enriching effect on our game as well?

Perhaps so, and I am intrigued to pursue this. But I have two (possibly conflicting) impulses:

1. In order for Alignment Language to work within the context of the Arandish Campaign, I want it to have at least some (however tenuous) connection to the history and culture(s) of the game-world, and yet

2. I do not want to start over-explaining or house-ruling the crap out of the concept before we've even played it. That is, I at least want to try to play Alignment Languages as written.

What has been written about Alignment Languages? Let's see.

+ From Labyrinth Lord Revised (Proctor, 2009) p. 14:

"All alignments have alignment languages. In addition to the common tongue and other languages known, as indicated by class, adherents of a particular alignment share an alignment language that only they understand."

+ From Basic D&D Rulebook (Moldvay, 1981) p. B11:

"Each alignment has a secret language of passwords, hand signals, and other body motions. Player characters and intelligent monsters will always know their alignment languages. They will also recognize when another alignment language is being spoken, but will not understand it. Alignment languages are not written down, nor may they be learned unless a character changes alignment. When this happens, the character forgets the old alignment language and starts using the new one immediately." [emphasis added]

+ From DMG (Gygax, 1979) p. 24:

"Alignment language is a handy game tool which is not unjustifiable in real terms. Thieves did employ a special cant. Secret organizations and societies did and do have certain recognition signs, signals, and recognition phrases- possibly special languages (of limited extent) as well. Consider also the medieval Catholic Church which used Latin as a common recognition and communication base to cut across national boundaries. In AD&D, alignment languages are the special set of signs, signals, gestures, and words which intelligent creatures use to inform other intelligent creatures of the same alignment of their fellowship and common ethos. Alignment languages are NEVER flaunted in public. They are not used as salutations or interrogatives if the speaker is uncertain of the alignment of those addressed. Furthermore, alignment languages are of limited vocabulary and deal with the ethos of the alignment in general, so lengthy discussion of varying subjects cannot be conducted in such tongues.

"Each alignment language is constructed to allow recognition of like-aligned creatures and to discuss the precepts of the alignment in detail. Otherwise, the tongue will permit only the most rudimentary communication with a vocabulary limited to a few score words. The speaker could inquire of the listener's state of health, ask about hunger, thirst, or degree of tiredness. A few other basic conditions and opinions could be expressed, but no more. The specialty tongues of Druidic and the Thieves' Cant are designed to handle conversations pertaining to things druidical on the one hand and thievery, robbery and the disposal of stolen goods on the other. Druids could discuss at length and in detail the state of the crops, weather, animal husbandry and foresting; but warfare, politics, adventuring, and like matter would be impossible to detail with the language.

"Any character foolish enough to announce his or her alignment by publicly crying out in that alignment tongue will incur considerable social sanctions. At best he or she will be thought unmannerly, rude, boorish, and stupid. Those of the same alignment will be inclined to totally ignore the character, not wishing to embarrass themselves by admitting any familiarity with the offender. Those of other alignment will likewise regard the speaker with distaste when overhearing such an outburst. At worst, the character will be marked by those hostile to the alignment in which he or she spoke.

"Alignment language is used to establish credentials only after initial communications have been established by other means. Only in the most desperate of situations would any creature utter something in the alignment tongue otherwise. It must also be noted that alignment does NOT necessarily empower a creature to actually speak or understand the alignment language which is general in the ethos. Thus, blink dogs are intelligent, lawful good creatures who have a language of their own. A lawful good human, dwarf, or brownie will be absolutely at a loss to communicate with blink dogs, however, except in the most limited of ways (non-aggression, non-fear, etc.) without knowledge of the creatures' language or some magical means. This is because blink dogs do not intellectually embrace the ethos of lawful good but are of that alignment instinctually; therefore, they do not speak the tongue used by lawful good. This is not true of gold dragons, let us say, or red dragons with respect to their alignment, who do speak their respective alignment languages."

+ From this post by James Smith:

"[Alignment] languages are limited in scope, mainly dealing with matters directly related to the ethos they serve. Seen in this light and in a culture so heavily influenced by the gods, Alignment Languages don't seem so ridiculous, at all. If you're still not on board, imagine two Religious Fundamentalists having an in-depth theological discussion. Or, better yet, two Hermetic Qabalists. Even better, two Physicists. If you're not into the same thing, you might understand some of it and may be able to identify their 'alignment,' but a lot of the terminology and meaning would go right over your head."

My thoughts at this point
In terms of grounding these concepts in a specific game-world setting like the Lands of Ara, the best analogy I can come up with is drawn from Tolkien, wherein the Lawful alignment language would loosely correlate with the elven tongue (i.e., the language of the most learned "good guys" or forces of civilization) and Chaotic with the language of Mordor. I will be looking to make a similar connection with Ara, i.e., to place the alignment languages in the context of key races / groups who already live there, while bearing in mind that these are limited languages: a "special set of signs, signals, gestures, and words" according to Gygax. More on this in the next post.