After getting sidetracked...
I'm now on page 50, having just finished the section on
Spell Explanations and moved on into
The Adventure (Land Adventures.)
The Spell Explanations section gives further rules for adjudicating select Spells. They seem to be a mixture of Mr. Gygax deciding some things needed to be expounded upon for DM's (and the knowledge kept from players) and, I would think, Rulings he came up with and passed along, from actual play experience.
"Earthquake: ... An earth elemental in the spell area has the effect of negating 10% to 100% of the spell effects (d10,0 +100%) if the elemental is of forces opposed to the cleric casting the earthquake spell."
I'd like to think that a player came up with that one and Gary thought it a good enough idea, to incorporate into the notes on the spell. Or, that he used it to screw up a player's plans. The notion of either event, makes me smile.
Here's one, which my early gaming group found rather early and used quite frenquently:
"Light: It should be noted that if this spell is cast upon the visage or before the visual organs of a creature, it will tend to blind it (rather as if a strong light were placed before its eyes), and its attacks and defenses will be a -4 on "to hit", saving throw, and even armor class. Note also that the spell is not mobile, although it can be cast upon a movable or mobile object or creature."
Pretty damn nifty, for a 1st level utility spell, huh? The Player's Handbook doesn't mention the possibility of Blinding, but does state that if the spell is cast upon a creature, said victim receives a Saving Throw to avoid having the spell manifest upon it. There are several instances, where Mr. Gygax makes sure to tell the DM that he shouldn't let the Player's in on all their options, but rather to bloody well make them figure it out for themselves.
There are some Rulings in this section, which I don't care for. Like the Heal spell not curing Mental Illnesses.
Alas, there's only a handful of Illusionist spells, explicated more fully. I wonder how many Illusionist's Gary DM'd?
The DMG has been, thus far, filled with good advice, excellent ideas and useful information. But, I'm left with the feeling that Gary is doing too much of my imagining for me.
Surprise!!! You're Scewed!
So, both sides roll a d6 for
Surprise. On a 1 or 2, you're surprised for the number of segments you rolled, minus any segments of
Surprise on the other side. If there's a Ranger in your party, you're only
Surprised on a 1 in 6. Unless a monster has a special
Surprise vs. opponents. Say, a
Lurker Above who
Surprises on 1-4 in 6. With a ranger in your party, he'll only
Surprise on a 1-3. If you roll a four and he rolls higher than a 2, you'll be
Surprised for 3 segments. If you have a Ranger. Otherwise, you'll be staring agog with your thumb up your ass for 4 segments. Why is this a big deal?
It's only a
really big deal, if the monster is close enough to attack. Like a
Lurker Above, who would probably just drop on you. In AD&D, he'll get his full attack action,
each segment the party is Surprised! The
Lurker only does 1-6 in damage, but I might could still kill the MU. Imagine a foe, who does more damage and has multiple attacks, getting 4 such full attack opportunities. Or, multiple monsters.
Reaction adjustments do help, but only for individual PC's. So, your Thief probably will recover fairly quickly and manage to close with the
Lurker, thus saving the MU's sorry butt. Unless, you know, he takes that opportunity to filch some treasure, or something.
All in all, when dealing with an encounter where a
Surprising monster is close enough to engage, multiple segments of attack are just too much! Unless the party is maybe eating dinner or otherwise engaged in really casual pursuits, I just don't see a battle-hardened, experienced Adventurer, being flat footed for 40 seconds. Or, even 20. Personally, unless special circumstances were involved, I wouldn't allow more than 1 segment of unanswered, full attack action from a
Surprising monster.
"It is important to make a distinction between character alignment and some powerful force of evil or good when this detection function is considered. In general, only a Know Alignment spell will determine the evil or good a character holds within. It must be a great evil or a strong good to be detected. Characters who are very strongly aligned, do not stray from their faith, and who are relatively high level (at least 8th or higher) might radiate evil or good if they are intent upon appropriate actions." The DMG - Page 60.
