The Giant Kingdom

I recently acquired a copy of the reprint of the Holmes-edited Blue Book that appeared in WotC's Silver Anniversary Collector's Edition, published in 1999. I was reading it last night before bed and came across what I thought was a typo peculiar to it in the "Foreword to the Original Edition."

From the map of the "land" of the "Great Kingdom" and environs -- the territory of the C&C Society -- Dave located a nice bog wherein to nest the weird enclave of "Blackmoor," a spot between the "Giant Kingdom" and the fearsome "Egg of Coot."

Clearly, "Giant Kingdom" is an error, since I was sure it must have originally read "Great Kingdom." So I figured that the error must have been an artifact of WotC's reproduction process, perhaps the use of OCR software or something. But, when I looked at my TSR copy of Holmes, I found the exact same phrase, "Giant Kingdom." This sent me running to my copy of Volume 1 of OD&D, since I was now starting to wonder whether it, too, referenced this mysterious "Giant Kingdom." If so, it meant I'd somehow not noticed it all these years and it made me wonder just what this "Giant Kingdom" was.

Alas, the original foreword has the phrase "Great Kingdom" in place of "Giant Kingdom," as I'd suspected. This disappoints me a little, since, if "Giant Kingdom" had been there, it would have suggested a hitherto unknown aspect of Dave Arneson's Blackmoor campaign. Still, it's an interesting error and the fact that it's unique to Holmes makes me wonder how it happened.

Holmes Annoyance

My introduction to Dungeons & Dragons (and to the hobby itself) was through a copy of the Basic Set edited by Dr. J. Eric Holmes. The edition I owned didn't included dice -- it had chits and a coupon for dice -- and module B1, In Search of the Unknown. According to the Acaeum, that means I owned either the fifth or sixth editions of the set.

My original copy of the game was long ago destroyed. The box was crushed, I took the rulebook apart, and module B1 fell to pieces from so much use. When I was in high school, my father stumbled across a dusty copy of the game in a hobby store and picked it up for me. I was quite pleased, because I'd wanted to replace it, but, in those pre-eBay days, replacing old games wasn't easy to do. Unfortunately, the copy my father found was a later printing and included B2, The Keep on the Borderlands as its intro module. In any event, sometime over the last two decades, I misplaced that copy.

Since then, I've been trying to find a good replacement copy for my Holmes boxed set. This is much harder than I had expected. Most of the copies I come across have B2 rather than B1. Even worse, most of them are in terrible condition. I don't expect a mint copy by any means -- nor would I likely shell out the money needed to purchase one -- but I would like a copy that doesn't smell of mildew or have Coke stains all over its contents.

So, with my birthday coming up this coming weekend, I thought I'd ask if my readers could help me locate a decent copy as a present to myself. I can't justify paying exorbitant prices for something that is largely a nostalgic indulgence. However, I would like a decent reader's copy that includes module B1. Looking online, they seem to be scarce, but perhaps I am looking in the wrong places. Any pointers would thus be greatly appreciated.

Between the Cracks

By now, I probably don't need to mention that my introduction to the hobby came by way of the Dungeons & Dragons basic set edited by Dr. J. Eric Holmes. That "Blue Book" has probably influenced me more than other RPG product I've ever owned, shaping my sense of what both D&D and roleplaying games are. Since I started this blog, I've met a lot of other gamers like myself, which is comforting. For the longest time, it seemed as if my friends and I were the only gamers who ever started with the Blue Book, everyone else seemingly having started with either the LBBs or one of the later, mass market editions of the game (or straight into AD&D).

The Blue Book exists in a weird place historically. Consequently, there are a lot of misconceptions about it. Perhaps the biggest one is that it was written as an introduction to Advanced Dungeons & Dragons. I've seen that suggestion made in quite a few places, often by people who ought to know better. To be fair, it's a position I myself believed for a long time, mostly because there are sections in the Blue Book that strongly imply this relationship. Moreover, the Blue Book only covers levels 1-3 and there were no follow-up products to it, so what exactly is the "upgrade path" after one is done with Holmes? For most people I knew, my friends and I included, it was AD&D.

But it was AD&D only because that was how TSR chose to market the game. It's clear that Holmes himself thought of the Blue Book as a revision of OD&D. Those references to AD&D in the text were, for the most part, later additions made by someone at TSR, even when their addition made the text more muddled and unclear. The LBBs and supplements were still being printed by TSR into the early 1980s, but they weren't stocked in most of the places where I purchased RPG products back in the day. So, the odds that most readers of Holmes would have looked to the LBBs as their next logical purchase were slim. I know I soon bought both the AD&D Monster Manual and Players Handbook as supplements to my Holmes game, because they were both readily available, while OD&D was not.

A close examination of Holmes's text quickly reveals that, despite the mentions of the then-largely unwritten AD&D -- only the Monster Manual was available, I believe -- it really does have more in common with the LBBs than not. There are some obvious deviations, but a great many of them are in fact Holmes's own inventions rather than "previews" of AD&D. Furthermore, Holmes draws heavily on the exact words found in the LBBs (and Greyhawk), though sometimes simplified for the purposes of clarity and concision. The Blue Book is deeply rooted in OD&D; to call it an introduction to AD&D is a distortion, even if it's a forgivable one.

Though most strongly connected to OD&D, it's not identical to it. The basic set also predates AD&D, even if it includes, thanks to TSR, a few nods toward that incipient ruleset. And then there are Holmes's own little idiosyncratic additions, like Dexterity-based initiative and a magic missile that requires a roll to hit. The Blue Book is the product of a strange alchemy, a composite edition that I increasingly think ought to be viewed as on its own merits rather than either as a simplification of OD&D or an introduction to AD&D. I mean, both those approaches have merit (the OD&D connection moreso than the AD&D), but neither really does the Blue Book justice.

In thinking about this lately, I've started to realize that my attachment to the Blue Book probably explains a lot about my place within the larger D&D community. I feel a lot of kinship with the OD&D folks, but I'm not one of them. I also appreciate the virtues of AD&D, but I've never been able to get on board with it fully, even back in the days when I was supposedly playing "AD&D." I have admiration for Moldvay, but I've never really played it. Anything after that is the "kid's stuff" I wouldn't touch then and have even less time for now. So, like the Blue Book itself, I sometimes feel like I occupy this weird space between the cracks in the history of Dungeons & Dragons. At least I know I'm not alone.

Holmes Maps

My birthday is this coming Friday and my good friend and business partner Richard sent me a very kind gift in the form of a copy of Dr. J. Eric Holmes's 1981 book Fantasy Role Playing Games. I'll likely be talking a lot about this book in the coming weeks as I work my way through it, but, having just flipped through it, I came across two images I had to share here:


I have no idea if these maps can be attributed to Dr. Holmes himself, although they certainly look similar to the dungeon map in the Blue Book (another map that may well not be the work of Holmes -- does anyone know its origins?). Regardless, these maps are interesting two me for a couple of reasons. First, they're keyed directly on to the map itself. This is a practice that seems to have been pretty commonplace in the old days. I can recall doing it on some of my earliest dungeons too and I believe that we have evidence that Gygax and Arneson both did this, at least to some degree.

Second, these maps are small, much like the map in the Blue Book. Nowadays, it's taken as Gospel that old school dungeons were megadungeons -- huge, sprawling campaign dungeons that could never be cleared and acted as the axes around which entire campaigns revolved. I certainly don't mean to dismiss that megadungeons of this sort existed, but I suspect, like many things in the old school renaissance, the prevalence of such megadungeons is probably exaggerated. I don't think it's for nothing that there are no published examples of megadungeons in the early days of the hobby, when most modules presented smaller "lair" dungeons. Likewise, none of the older guys I knew back then ran a megadungeon-based campaign. Instead, their campaigns were filled with many dungeons, some of them many levels deep but I don't think could compare to Castles Blackmoor or Greyhawk in terms of their size and scope.

In any case, the maps in Fantasy Role Playing Games are intriguing. I'm going to be reading the book closely to see if any sections of it discuss the creation of dungeons, with an eye toward trying to extract from it any insights into either Holmes's own philosophy of dungeon building or a more general sense of how referees at the time looked at this endeavor.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part XVII)

And so at last we come to Holmes's famed sample dungeon -- The Tower of Zenopus. More fully fleshed out than either the sample level in Volume 3 of OD&D or the Haunted Keep of Moldvay Basic, the Tower comes with several paragraphs of background that situate it within a larger world. Nearby is Portown, "a small but busy city linking the caravan routes from the south the merchant ships that dare the pirate-infested waters of the Northern Sea." Portown is also home to the Green Dragon Inn, which features in both Middle-earth's Bywater and Oerth's City of Greyhawk. I sometimes wonder if it's a requirement that there be an inn with this name in all fantasy worlds. There isn't yet one in my Dwimmermount campaign, but perhaps I need to rectify that.

Before providing a sample map -- or "floor plan," as Holmes calls it -- of one level of the Tower, Holmes briefly talks about the employment of "men-at-arms." Interestingly, he suggests they be employed primarily when only one character is attempting to explore the dungeon. This isn't evidence one way or the other regarding the decline of hirelings as an element of game play, but it is interesting. Remember that in Holmes's various articles elsewhere, including in his novel, The Maze of Peril, hirelings play important roles. Still, I thought it worth noting.

Holmes's map, as you can see, doesn't use numbers for its key but letters, which, while not unique to Holmes, is still unusual. Though his map is simple, it's not a linear design, with many viable paths of exploration. There's also an underground river and sea cave, two elements that I frequently use in my own dungeon designs. Until I looked again at this map I hadn't realized how much of an influence it had exerted over me all these years later.

The room descriptions in Holmes are lengthy, partially because he describes their contents in greater detail, but also because he often includes game rules in the descriptions. For example, Room B houses four skeletons and Holmes takes time to note that "A first level cleric must roll a 7 or more on two 6-sided dice to turn them away and then make a second roll to see how many are turned away." He clearly intended this section to serve as both a tutorial for dungeon design and a refresher course for the rules he'd already presented.

Rather than go through each room in detail, I'm instead going to offer a few impressions based on what sticks out most in reading through the map key:

• Holmes is inconsistent as to whether he includes hit points in his monster descriptions, sometimes going so far as to suggest hit points should be rolled up on the spot.
• He includes cursory morale rules in one entry, suggesting that goblins will run away or surrender if more than half their number is killed.
• A 4th-level evil magic-user and his 2nd-level fighting man henchmen note that the MU has better saves than a 3rd-level one (by +1).
• Holmes includes some basic rules for swimming, drowning, and wearing armor in water.
• There's a clever little magic mask that will answer a single question put to it once a day. This is another element of this dungeon I've used again and again over the years.
• There are rules for adjudicating knock-down.
• There's even a "princess" to be rescued, Lemunda the Lovely, as well as an octopus, which is quite nasty, having 16 hit points and 6 attacks per round.
• The sarcophagus room is a nice companion piece to Mike Carr's pool room from Module B1, with many sarcophagi, some of which contain treasure and others monsters.
• The Tower of Zenopus seems to have several entrances in and out, including one in a nearby cemetery.
• In the magician's tower, there's a cage ape that, if released, may turn on his evil master rather than attack the PCs.
• Holmes also includes a new magic item, the wand of petrifaction, in the dungeon.

And with that, the Blue Book more or less ends. There's a brief section explaining how to use dice and read D&D's peculiar dice notation. There's also an even shorter biography of Dr. Holmes, followed by two pages of reference charts and tables. I used those tables for years after the fact, even when I was playing AD&D, because they were perforated and included everything I needed to play at levels 1-3.

Having now completed this examination of the Holmes-edited Basic Rules, I'll offer a few comments.

First, I think it's true beyond a shadow of any doubt that the Blue Book should be considered part of the OD&D family rather than a precursor to AD&D. Its AD&D connections are few and clumsy and there are enough rules differences between the two games that I don't think the Blue Book would serve as a particularly good introduction to AD&D. As an intro to OD&D, however, it's excellent, especially if one comes to it with a hobbyist mentality rather than expecting a "complete" game without the need to make the game one's own.

Second, I also think it's true that the Blue Book is probably one of the last major products published by TSR that strongly reflected a hobbyist philosophy and esthetic. That is, the Blue Book is not a "professional" product but rather the product of a talented and creative amateur sharing his love of the game with other talented and creative amateurs. It's an artifact from another time and it's little wonder to me that TSR would seek to replace it with something more "polished" in years to come.

Finally, on a personal level, it's been fascinating re-reading in depth a book that was my first introduction to the hobby. I'm amazed at how much is in Holmes that I've carried with me for three decades. I'm equally amazed at how many things I thought were in Holmes that aren't but were instead likely misinterpretations of passages in the Blue Book or house rules I adopted early and misremembered as stemming from it. I won't make the claim that the Blue Book is "the best" D&D Basic Rules ever written, because that's a very subjective claim. However, I will say that I am very glad it was my first rulebook and I wish there were one like it available today. Dr. Holmes was a great teacher and I consider myself fortunate to have learned from him.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part XVI)

Holmes includes a section entitled "Dungeon Mastering as a Fine Art," in which he briefly discusses the (literally) artistic side of refereeing: making maps. He notes that

There should be several levels and each level should have access above and below and be made up of interlocking corridors, passages, stairs, closed rooms, secret doors, traps, and surprises for the unwary.

Though not a direct quote, this echoes much of the advice found in Volume 3 of OD&D. Beneath the section, there's this famous cross-section:
I can't calculate the way that this single illustration exerted an influence over my imagination. Even now, when I think of a dungeon, it's Stone Mountain that comes to mind. Also of interest is the fact that the text of the Blue Book notes that the Basic Set "includes the introductory module 'In Search of the Unknown'," even though later printings included The Keep on the Borderlands instead.

Next, Holmes provides us with a section entitled "Sample Floor Plan, Part of First Level." Before he actually gets around to showing us his sample dungeon, though, he digresses into a broad discussion of playing the game, including an example of play. Holmes reiterates OD&D by stating that "many rooms should be empty," two-thirds of them in fact. He also explains that

Traps should not be of the "Zap! You're dead!" variety but those which a character might avoid or overcome with some quick thinking and a little luck.

That single sentence alone says a great deal about the culture of play at the time, especially when combined with this one:

The possibility of "death" must be very real, but players must be able to win through luck and courage, or they will lose interest in the game and not come back.

Twice now Holmes has emphasized the importance of luck, something I too think is essential to the appeal of roleplaying games. His use of the term "courage" is intriguing. I suspect he meant "boldness" or "daring," suggesting that players ought not to be timid and paranoid and that be willing to take chances often yields positive results.

Holmes does suggest that the use of "appropriate speech" is an important part of the fun in the game, by which he clearly means "speaking in character." He also provides examples of swearing by deities, such as "Zeus, Crom, Cthulhu, or whatever," which says something about his own inspirations. Of course, he later on adds that

The imaginary universe of Dungeons & Dragons obviously lies not too far from the Middle Earth of J.R.R. Tolkien's great Lord of the Rings trilogy. The D&D universe also impinges on the fantasy worlds of Fritz Leiber, Robert E. Howard, Gardner F. Fox, classical mythology and any other source of inspiration the Dungeon Master wants to use.

In addition to the usual Mapper and Caller positions, Holmes suggests that one player "keep a 'Chronicle' of the monsters killed, treasure obtained, etc." This is the first time I've seen reference to such a role but it's possible it is mentioned elsewhere.

In his example of play, most of the dialog is between the D.M. and Caller, with an occasional interjection from another player. What's interesting is that, unlike in Moldvay, Holmes's example never refers to characters by their names, instead saying only "halfling" or "the fighter." My favorite bit from the example is the following exchange:

Caller: "Does he hear anything?"
D.M.: (Carefully rolling a secret die for end-of-turn wandering monster) "No. But the halfling guarding the door reports hearing slithering noises outside."
Player: "Hey, everybody, I hear slithering noises!"

That's pure gold right there.

As noted throughout this series, Holmes considers the role of the referee paramount, even going so far as to note that "the success of an expedition depends on the Dungeon Master and his creation, the dungeon." That's an unusual perspective but one that certainly makes sense in context -- without the DM's preparation beforehand, the game would be impossible. Holmes then ends his referee's section with the following reminder:

These rules are intended as guidelines. No two Dungeon Masters run their dungeons quite the same way, as anyone who has learned the game with one group and then transferred to another can easily attest. You are sure to encounter situations not covered by these rules. Improvise. Agree on a probability that an event will occur and convert it into a die roll -- roll the number and see what happens! The game is intended to be fun and the rules modified if the players desire. Do not hesitate to invent, create and experiment with new ideas. Imagination is the key to a good game. Enjoy!

It's almost certainly an exaggeration to call these this the best referee's advice ever given, but that shouldn't take away from the fact that it's excellent advice that I've carried with me ever since 1979 when I first read it. In particular, the notion that no one should expect any two campaigns to be the same is one I like and one that I wish had held the day within the hobby.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part XV)

I should have mentioned this the other day, but Holmes includes no rules for intelligent swords in the Blue Book. Moldvay follows his lead on this, relegating such rules to the Cook/Marsh Expert Rulebook.

Holmes's ring of invisibility follows OD&D. However, he changes the LBBs' ring of mammal control to a ring of animal control. The ring controls the same number of animals as in OD&D but the scope of its power has been broadened. His ring of plant control is seemingly unique, having no counterpart in OD&D that I can find. The ring of weakness in the Blue Book is slightly different, being clearer in its mechanical function and possessing a 5% chance that it works in reverse. The ring of protection and ring of three wishes both function as in OD&D, right down to the injunction to the referee to use the latter as a means to punish greedy players who attempt abuse its magic. Likewise, the ring of regeneration, ring of water walking, and ring of fire resistance follow OD&D, though Holmes actually provides descriptions for the latter two rather than simply referring the reader to spell descriptions. The ring of contrariness follows Greyhawk.

Holmes follows OD&D when it comes to the general powers of wands (6d6 damage and 100 charges). He doesn't make reference to how many charges staves have, however, which is odd, particularly since Supplement I clarifies that even the staff of striking uses charges to function. He provides a duration for the fear engendered by a wand of fear, while his wand of magic detection and wand of secret door and trap detection follow OD&D except to convert inches to feet for range purposes. His other wands also follow OD&D, although the wand of fireballs gets a lengthier description that repeats some of the details of the fireball spell on which it's based, presumably because Holmes doesn't include such a description earlier in the book. Holmes's staves all conform to their OD&D antecedents. The rod of cancellation, meanwhile, is generally the same as in Supplement I, but Holmes adds that "the character employing the rod adds 2 to his die roll to score hits," a sentence not found in Greyhawk.

The crystal ball, medallion of ESP, and bag of holding follow OD&D. The elven cloak still only makes the wearer "next to invisible," but there are explicit rules for how the wearer can be seen. Elven boots are unchanged. The broom of flying is more specific about its speed with two riders but is otherwise unchanged. The helm of telepathy is roughly identical to OD&D, but the game mechanics are different, with the LBBs using the random monster action rules and Holmes employing a straight saving throw. The bag of devouring follows Greyhawk. The helm of chaos (law) is now called helm of evil/good and functions according to the fivefold alignment system. The helm also turns a Neutral character into someone "totally self-seeking" as opposed to OD&D's notion that the helm makes them become either Lawful or Chaotic, which suggests yet another shift in the meaning of alignment from the LBBs to Holmes. The rope of climbing from Supplement I is here and gets a lengthier and more detailed description of its powers. Gauntlets of ogre power more or less follow OD&D, though the range of damage dealt is slightly different (2-8 rather than 3-8) and Holmes riffs off the exceptional strength table (though does not follow it) by granting the wearer of the gauntlets the ability to carry more weight.

Holmes concludes his discussion of magic items by noting that the referee should penalize any character who "has a hireling or non-player character flunkie try out a newly found piece of equipment" out of fear for its possibly harmful effects. He suggests that such NPC guinea pigs "demand to keep [a magic item] if it proves to be beneficial" and will seek revenge if the opposite is the case.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part XIV)

Magic weapons in Holmes differ slightly from those in OD&D. As already noted, he retains the LBBs' insistence that a magic sword's bonus is to hit only, unless it has an additional bonus against particular opponents, like undead or dragons. Likewise, magical weapons other than swords grant their bonus to both hit and damage, as in OD&D. In Holmes, both magic bows and magic arrows grant bonuses only to hit, not damage, whereas in OD&D, magic arrows grant a bonus to both. I can see the logic in Holmes's position here, since Dexterity grants only a bonus to hit, not damage, but it's still odd that he deviated from the LBBs on this score.

Holmes notes that

Some method of detecting the effects of a potion must be found. If the characters lack a detect magic spell, they may dare a tiny sip to see what the result may be. This would leave enough potion to accomplish its complete effect.

This is an interesting passage. First, it suggests that detect magic could be used to identify the type of potion, although it's admittedly far from clear on that point. Second, it states that one might be able to take a sip to identify a potion, presumably with its effects, whatever they may be, lasting only briefly. It's funny because, back when I first used Holmes, we interpreted this latter point by giving each type of potion a distinctive taste, so that, with time and careful records, one could learn that, for example, a strawberry flavored liquid was a potion of healing, while a cherry flavored one was a potion of haste.

As in OD&D, a potion of growth can be drunk multiple times, with the amount of the whole drunk determining how tall a character grows. A potion of diminution, meanwhile, does not work similarly. Holmes's potion of giant strength is more potent than that in OD&D, granting 3d6 bonus damage rather than 2d6. Otherwise, the potions in the Blue Book are like those in the LBBs, except fewer in number.

Scrolls in Holmes are quite distinctive. As in OD&D, they are purely the province of the magic-user, except for protection scrolls. He does not provide any means of determining the spells inscribed on a scroll, suggesting only "some random method," but the LBBs are only slightly more helpful in this regard. Protection scrolls in Holmes are more powerful than in OD&D, affecting the same area (10' radius) but lasting 6 turns for all types and having no limit on how many enemies against whom it is effective, as in the LBBs.

More intriguing is that Holmes scrolls can replicate the effects of "any potion spell except delusion or poison," "any ring spell except wishes or regeneration," and "any wand spell," meaning that, in a campaign that uses these rules, there are scrolls of gaseous form, scrolls of contrariness, and scrolls of fear. There are also scrolls of healing, which would enable a magic-user to cast cure light wounds. Now, it's worth noting that, in Blue Book, there is no means to copy a scroll spell into a spellbook, so, even if a MU finds a scroll of healing, he can't use it to add magical healing to his repertoire. Still, it's an odd thing nonetheless and it does make one wonder both what Dr. Holmes was thinking here and how one explains the existence of such scrolls within the game world. I personally see Holmes's scrolls as an opportunity to "shake things up," reminding players that magic doesn't always play by the rules, but, even so, it's hard to deny that Holmes's approach is an aberration in the history of the game, both without precedent beforehand and never again employed in subsequent editions.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part XIII)

Coins use the same values as in OD&D, while gems are slightly less valuable overall. The chart for determining the value of gems is skewed toward the low end and there is no chance for a gem being more valuable in 1000 gold pieces. Jewelry is similarly less valuable, ranging only from 300-1800 gp in value, as opposed to OD&D's 300-10,000 gp. Interestingly, both Holmes and OD&D discuss damaging jewelry through various means and how much such damage decreases its value, with Holmes lowering it by 50% and OD&D by only 25%.

The treasure type tables in Holmes are different than those in both OD&D and AD&D. In the case of OD&D, a major difference is that there are treasure types beyond Type I, although there are other differences as well, such as the inclusion of electrum and platinum coins. The percentages are also slightly different, with, for example, a 15% on one table becoming 20% on another or a range of 2-16 on one becoming 4-16 on another. Consequently, Holmes's tables are unique and it's hard for me to say whether they're closer to either OD&D or AD&D, as his tables clearly borrow from both.

Holmes retains OD&D's notion that 25% of all references to "any" in the magic items column of the treasure tables refer to maps, which is something I'm rather fond of. Except for adding together the categories of "armor" and "miscellaneous weapons," Holmes's magic items table is identical to that of OD&D, right down to the chances of an item of any given category's appearing. However, as you'd expect from an introductory game, the selection of items within each category is smaller -- just 10 in each -- and they're generated by a 1D10 roll rather than a percentile one.

Here are the items Holmes drops within each category:

Swords: Sword +1, +3 vs. Trolls (Clerics), Sword +1 Wishes Included (2-8 Wishes), Sword +2, Charm Person Ability, Sword, One Life Energy Draining Ability. Holmes also adds a second cursed sword not found in OD&D, namely the Sword -1 Cursed.

Armor and Weapons: Armor & Shield +1, Shield +2, Armor +2, Armor & Shield +2, Shield +3, Mace +2, Warhammer +2, Warhammer +3, 6" Throwing Range with Return, Spear +2, Spear +3. Holmes adds Cursed Armor -1.

Potions: Polymorph (Self), ESP, Longevity, Clairvoyance, Clairaudience, Animal Control, Undead Control, Plant Control, Human Control, Giant Control, Dragon Control, Invulnerability, Fire Resistance, Treasure Finding, Heroism.

Scrolls: Holmes's scrolls are unusual and I'll discuss at greater length in the next part of this series. For now, it's worth noting that Holmes does not include a scroll of protection from elementals (presumably because there are no elementals in his monster listing) nor does he give scrolls a chance to have more than 3 spells, while OD&D allows 7 as a possibility.

Rings: Human Control, Delusion, Protection 5' r., Djinn Summoning, Telekinesis, X-Ray Vision, Spell Turning, Spell Storing, Many Wishes (4-24). Holmes introduces the ring of plant control found in Supplement I.

Wands and Staves: Metal detection, enemy detection, illusion, lightning bolts, polymorph, negation, staff of commanding, staff of withering, staff of power, staff of wizardry. Holmes includes the rod of cancellation from Greyhawk.

Miscellaneous Magic Items: Holmes includes only 10 magic items in this category, as opposed to nearly 30 in OD&D. His selections are, as you might expect, generally geared toward the lower end of the power spectrum. I'll have more to say on this in a future post in this series.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part XII)

Lycanthropes in Holmes follow the general outline established in the LBBs and Supplement I. Again, as with dragons and giants, all can be of Neutral alignment, as well as some other alignment. There's no discussion of the social structure of these creatures, as there is in OD&D. Manticores get a name change from manticoras. Medusas are as in OD&D, but it's noted in Holmes that "This monster is usually female," implying that there are male medusas. Minotaurs are identical to the LBBs, right down to the joke about rules lawyers being bull-headed. Mummies acquire their ability to frighten those who see them in Holmes (or, rather, in the Monster Manual, but Holmes follows suit). Ochre jellies and ogres are as in OD&D. Orcs are very similarly presented, but there's much less detail on the contents of an orc lair in Holmes than there is in the LBBs.

Owl bears and pegasi are mostly unchanged. Pixies drop any reference to Chainmail and are noted as being "friendly with elves and fairies," the latter of which corresponds to no creature in Holmes or OD&D. Purple worms aren't much changed, but they swallow opponents more easily than in OD&D, requiring only 2 more than the needed number of 1D20, whereas in OD&D they need 4 more to do so. Rust monsters follow Greyhawk. Shadows remain incorporeal creatures that are not counted among the undead. Shriekers appear here, an import from the Monster Manual. Skeletons and spectres are unchanged and Holmes explicitly connects spectres to the Nazgûl of Tolkien. Spiders get a full write-up, as in AD&D and notes that giant spiders are both intelligent and chaotic evil in alignment.

Stirges from Supplement I appear and troglodytes from the Monster Manual appear (though the latter first appeared, I believe, in The Lost Caverns of Tsojconth tournament module). The troll entry is nearly identical to that in OD&D, including the description of them as "thin and rubbery." The unicorn entry is interesting for a couple of reasons. First, it makes reference to the dimension door spell, which is nowhere described in Holmes. Second, the OD&D entry specifies that "they resist magic as if they were an 11th level Magic-User," while Holmes states taht "they resist all magic on a roll of 8 or better on a 20-sided die." Now, it's true that an 11th level MU has a save of 8 against spells in OD&D, so it's almost certainly the case that Holmes meant the two rules to be identical. However, as a young man, I took this to mean something above and beyond a saving throw.

Vampires follow OD&D, with the additional clarifications presented in Supplement I. However, Holmes is stronger in noting that holy symbols other than a cross are effective against vampires, an option which Greyhawk leaves to the referee's discretion. Wights and wraiths are as per OD&D, though Holmes (again) makes a connection to Tolkien, this time in reference to wights. Yellow mold and zombies follow OD&D. Interestingly, the zombie entry notes that, in addition to sleep and charm spells like all other undead, zombies are also immune to ESP, which is peculiar.

And that wraps up the monsters of the Blue Book. I'll reiterate that I found it interesting how much Holmes lifts straight from the LBBs, right down to whole blocks of text. The stats are similarly nearly identical to those in OD&D, with only a few small changes here and there, many of which, I suspect, are reflective of changes in the Monster Manual, the only AD&D book released at the time of the Basic Set's completion and one that, as others have repeatedly shown, is itself a lot more reflective of OD&D than is commonly supposed.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part XI)

Interestingly, Holmes offers up only four types of dragons in his rulebook -- white, black, red, and brass. I can't quite figure out why he choose these four, since they both differ from those in the LBBs and the red dragon is one of the most powerful of all dragon types, so the list isn't based on "level appropriateness." Holmes also extends Greyhawk's notion that many dragons can be either Lawful or Neutral to include evil dragons as well, which, with the exception of the red, can be either Neutral or Chaotic Evil. He also simplifies the roll to determine if a dragon uses its breath weapon from a 2D6 roll to a 1D6 roll. Likewise, the dimension of a cone-shaped breath attack is altered slightly (5-foot diameter at the dragon's mouth in the LBBs vs. 2-foot diameter in Blue Book).

Dragon age categories are expanded in Holmes to account for the fact that monsters now use D8 hit dice rather than D6, so the "very old" and "ancient" categories are new. He also changes the description of the age ranges within each category, so that, for example, an "old" Blue Book dragon is 101-150 years old, whereas he was only 76-100 years old in the LBBs. OD&D has no rules for determining the gender of a dragon, whereas Holmes does, explicitly linking small size with being female and large six with being male. Despite this, there is no mention of dragon family units, as there is in OD&D. Likewise, Holmes dragons, though intelligent, are not explicitly given the power of speech (though it's implied) and there's no reference to their being spellcasters.

Dragon breath weapon damage is tied to hit points, but, like OD&D, there's no clarification as to whether this number decreases as a dragon takes damage. As a younger man, I always assumed that the damage was tied to current hit points, but the text nowhere states this outright. Dragon subdual is significantly less mechanically complex in Holmes, dropping any reference to a percentage chance based on damage done. At the same time, Holmes notes that subdual lasts for "a maximum of one month," something not stated in the LBBs that I can see and that "thereafter it will seek to kill its captor(s) and/or escape." Furthermore, there's no system for determining how much a subdued dragon brings on the open market in the Blue Book, as there is in the LBBs.

In general, Holmes dragons are much simpler mechanically than those in OD&D.

Dwarves and elves include references to the maximum levels possible to them in full OD&D. Fire beetles from Supplement II are included, the first such creature from Blackmoor I've noticed. Gargoyles and gelatinous cubes follow OD&D. Elven immunity to ghouls is noted in its entry but there's no mention of the victims of ghouls rising as ghouls themselves. Giants in Holmes are, more or less, as presented in OD&D and Supplement I. The main difference is that, as with dragons, he makes them all of variable alignment, with even frost and fire giants occasionally Neutral in aspect. Holmes also includes derived from Chainmail to handle giants' rock throwing abilities, something not done in the LBBs, which simply refer the reader back to Chainmail.

Giant ants and giant centipedes get their own entries in Holmes rather than being relegated to "large insects or animals." The same goes for giant rats, which also get a disease transmitted through their bite. Giant ticks follow Supplement I. Gnolls become hyena-men in Holmes. Gnomes begin their sad descent into being also-ran dwarves as well. Goblins follow OD&D, as do gray ooze and green slime; the same goes for griffons. Harpies are roughly similar to their appearance in Greyhawk, but Holmes's phrasing -- "By their singing they lure men to them" -- made me think that female characters were immune to its effects, something not noted in the text.

Hell hounds are as in Supplement I, but there's no note of their being used as pets by fire giants. Hippogriffs follow the LBBs, as do hobgoblins, right down to the reference to their having +1 morale, even though there are no morale rules in the Blue Book. Different types of horses are distinguished, but Holmes leaves out how much weight each type can carry as a load. Hydras follow OD&D. Kobolds are much the same as before, but their description notes that they're "evil dwarf-like creatures [who] behave much like goblins," which is closer to their mythological inspirations than the dog-men they became later. Lizard men are here and follow Greyhawk.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part X)

What's really remarkable about the monster listings in Holmes is how consistent they are with the information in the LBBs and Greyhawk, to the point of having the same armor class, hit dice, treasure types, etc. There are some exceptions here and there, of course, but, even so, there's a high degree of continuity between OD&D and Holmes when it comes to monster statistics. The main differences, overall, seem to be that Holmes states outright things that are merely implied in the LBBs, as befits a book intended as an introductory text for use by beginners.

As noted elsewhere, Holmes follows Supplement I in giving monsters D8 for hit dice. They also use Greyhawk-style attacks with variable damage, despite the text's implying in places that such a complexity would be reserved to AD&D.

Holmes addresses the issue of balancing the power of monsters against the experience of the characters facing them in this way:

In setting up his dungeon, the Dungeon Master should be guided by the table given under Wandering Monsters, so that adventurers have a reasonable chance of survival. There is endless opportunity for inventiveness in the game, however, and if a high hit dice monster is desired, ways can be invented to scale it down so that a low level party can have a chance of defeating it. If one wanted to use a chimera, for instance, in a campaign with low level characters, the creature could be scaled down. Maybe it ran into a high level magic-user and was partially shrunk by a magic spell, reducing its high points. Or there might be a special magic sword, effective only against this chimera, hidden in the dungeon, and the adventurers given a hint or a legend that might lead them to it. In the interest of maintaining the balance of the game, however, a small or weak monster must not have a treasure anything like the hoard of a normal monster.

Concerns about handing out too much and too little treasure, as well as the rate of experience gain have already been touched upon here.

Bandits get a lengthy entry, as in OD&D, breaking down the full composition of a force of these men, including armor, weapons, and magical accoutrements. Interestingly, Holmes continues to use OD&D's "supernormal characters" to refer to any character who has a class and levels. Basilisks are as in OD&D, as are berserkers, though I adore the fact that their entry ends with a two-word paragraph -- "No prisoners." (This seems to be a reference to the fact that many Men have captives/prisoners amongst them). Black puddings are as in OD&D, but there is no reference to gray puddings in Holmes. Blink dogs and bugbears follow Supplement I. Carrion crawlers and cockatrices are true to OD&D. Chimeras are slightly more potent in Holmes, as its goat horns do increased damage. The displacer beast follows Greyhawk and djinni get a much-lengthened entry, elucidating their magical powers in some detail. The doppelganger entry follows Supplement I, except that Holmes spells out exactly what the creature needs for certain saving throws, as opposed to simply saying that it saves as a 10th-level fighter.

Monsters continue tomorrow.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part IX)

The resolution of combat, which Holmes calls "the most exciting part of the game," is probably the area where the Blue Book differs the most and often most subtly from the LBBs. It's also where I suspect that the editorial hand of Gygax or someone else at TSR muddled things the most. For example, Holmes states that "The more complex system used for advanced play allows for varying amounts of damage by different weapons and by various sorts of monsters," but, while the rules do stick to OD&D's 1d6 damage for all weapon types, the monster listings follow Greyhawk despite the quote above. This is corroborated later, when it's noted that "The number of damage points scored by a monster is variable."

Holmes's discussion of combat is longer than in OD&D for two reasons. One, there are no references to Chainmail and everything, right down to how to roll dice, is explained in greater detail. The result is a system that's no more complex than in the LBBs but is more clear. Holmes does note, however, that

The combat tables used by D&D gamers are often extremely complicated. Full tables are given in ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS. The tables below are deliberately simplified, but will take some practice to use them with facility. Once the system is mastered, however, players can add whatever modifications they wish.

Again, Holmes encourages tinkering with the rules. His "deliberately simplified" combat tables cover only levels 1-3, at which levels all character classes have the same hit probabilities in OD&D, although this differs from AD&D, where fighting men gain better hit chances faster. Holmes also includes a line for a "normal man," something not explicit in OD&D but descended from Chainmail. The numbers on the chart match those in the LBBs.

Holmes retains a strong association between an armor class number and the type of armor it signifies, so AC 7 says "leather armor" in the combat chart itself, a connection AD&D hopelessly muddles with its introduction of overlapping armor types. Unfortunately, the Blue Book isn't entirely consistent on this point.

The "armor class" of humanoid monsters is literally the armor they are wearing (or possibly their skin/hide!). For non-human creatures, however, it is assigned partly on this basis, with strong armor class for scales and shells, and partly on the basis of difficulty to hit. Thus a small fast creature, like a vampire bat, might be hard to hit with a sword and could be assigned "armor class: plate" (AC 3) to indicate this, although its own skin would make it seem more like "armor class: none."

Granted, this ambiguity has always been present in D&D, but this passage really lays it bare. Oddly, Holmes uses the phrases "armor class: plate" and "armor class: none," which I rather like, as they show much more clearly that the armor class numbers are not meant to be target numbers but rather numeric signifiers -- shorthand for ease of communication.

Holmes's monster attack tables differ from those in OD&D. The hit dice categories are slightly different, especially at the low end. For example, the LBBs start the chart at "Up to 1" hit dice, while Holmes starts it at "up to 1+1." It's a small thing but a possibly noteworthy one.

Simple rules for poisoned weapons are introduced, with differing saves depending on the effect of the poison. The rules also note that "It is recommended that the Dungeon Master not allow players to make use of poisoned weapons in all but extreme situations." Flaming oil is explicitly treated as a weapon as well. There are details of how much area burning oil covers, how much damage it does, and how long it burns before extinguishing. More interesting is that there's a system presented for how to throw oil, with the number needed on a 1D20 roll not being connected to the target's armor class but rather its size. Using oil is a two-stage process, requiring first a hit with the oil and a separate hit with a flaming object, such as a torch or a lantern, to ignite it. Burning oil is effective against corporeal undead, although those immune to normal weapons take only half damage from it. Of course, holy water works exactly like burning oil against all undead, except that it (presumably) doesn't require a second roll to ignite it and it does full damage against even those immune to normal weapons.

Missile combat is fairly straightforward, with short ranged attacks getting a bonus to hit and long ranged getting a penalty. Cover is treated briefly and it's noted that characters cannot safely fire into melee because of the probability of hitting friendly characters.

Holmes follows OD&D in noting that a magic weapon's bonus applies only to hit, not damage, as additional damage is among those "other powers" a magic weapon might possess. Meanwhile, bonuses for magic armor and shields subtract from the attacker's roll rather than changing the armor class of the defender. It's a small point perhaps, but it's consonant with the LBBs' approach and is further evidence that armor class was originally intended to be static and closely tied to a single armor type.

As noted earlier, melee rounds are 10 seconds long. Movement during combat is limited to 20 feet per round for an unarmored man and 10 feet per round for an armored one. Daggers grant two attacks per round, while two-handed swords, battle axes, halberds, flails, morning stars, and most polearms can only be used once every other round. Light crossbows likewise operate only once every other round and heavy crossbows take "twice as long to load and fire." Monsters, on the other hand, can use their full routine of attacks each round.

Initiative is determined by Dexterity, with highest Dexterity going first. However, if the Dexterity scores of two combatants are"within 1 or 2 points of each, a 6-sided die is rolled for each opponent and the higher scorer gains initiative." Surprise is mentioned as granting initiative but there are no explicit rules for surprise. Attacking a fleeing target grants a +2 bonus to hit and the target does not benefit from wearing a shield. Holmes introduces rules for parrying. A character may elect not to attack but to parry an incoming attack, which imposes a penalty of -2 on his attacker's roll. If the attack still hit by rolling exactly the number needed, the parrying weapon is broken but no damage is inflicted. It takes a round to draw a new weapon. Holmes also grants a +2 bonus to attack any opponent withdrawing from combat. He mentions the possibility of surrendering but provides no rules to handle it beyond referee judgment.

The Blue Book provides two combat examples, a short one between a fighting man, Bruno the Battler, and a goblin. It's a very straightforward combat without anything unusual in it. The second example pits a party against six large spiders. Among the characters are Bruno the Battler in a return engagement, another fighting man named Mogo the Mighty, a magic-user named Malchor, and a cleric called Clarissa. Bruno "dies a horrible death" because of a failed save versus poison, alas.

This last example illustrates several things. When there is time, or when a magic-user says he is getting a spell ready, magic spells go off first. This is followed by any missile fire, if the distance to the monsters permits, and then melee is joined, after which no missile fire is permitted because of the danger of hitting friendly forces. If a magic-user is not involved in the melee he can get another spell off after 1 or more round have gone by. If he is personally attacked he can't concentrate to use his magic but must draw his dagger and defend his skin! However, if the magic-user had some magical device -- such as a wand or a staff -- it could be used in lieu of the dagger as an attack weapon.

And that pretty well sums up Blue Book combat, which is largely in line with the LBBs mechanically but much more clearly presented and simplified, adding only a few rules, such as parrying and Dexterity-based initiative, that seem to represent house rules employed by Holmes.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part VIII)

Clerical magic, in contrast to that of magic-users, is noted for being "divinely given," thereby freeing the cleric from having to study to learn them. This would seem to be a reference to the Chance to Know table based on Intelligence rather than an account of how spells are memorized by clerics. There's in fact no explanation given for how long one must rest, if at all, after exhausting one's daily complement of clerical spells, so one must assume that it's similar to that of magic-users.

Holmes details eight first and eight second level spells, although, as he notes "Second level spells are not available to clerics of below fourth level, and are included for use with non-player characters and scrolls." This is in contrast to the 3rd-level MU spells, which he lists only by name but provides no descriptions for.

Of the 1st-level spells, two are new: remove fear and resist cold. Cure light wounds follows OD&D but with the added detail that "the cleric must touch the wounded person to heal him." Detect evil and detect magic are identical to their MU counterparts, as are light, protection from evil, and purify food and water. Remove fear is an interesting spell, because, despite its name, it does not remove fear but instead grants a bonus to a saving throw against fear equal to the level of the cleric. Someone who is already failed a save and become afraid when remove fear is cast upon him gains a second saving throw at the appropriate bonus. Resist cold, meanwhile, gives both a flat bonus to saves versus cold and a reduction of -1 per die of cold damage dealt.

Of the 2nd-level spells, two are new here as well: know alignment and resist fire. Bless follows OD&D, right down to the bonus to morale, a concept Holmes treats only obliquely in his rulebook. Find traps and hold person likewise follow the LBBs. Know alignment is, as noted, new and it's, in my opinion, a terrible spell that runs counter to the treatment of alignment in both OD&D and in Holmes. The spell doesn't merely let the caster know the target's alignment (i.e. Lawful Good, Chaotic Evil, etc.), but also "how lawful or chaotic, good or evil, a creature is." It's silly and problematic on many levels and I think D&D was better as a game without it.

Resist fire functions nearly identically to resist cold, except that it states it allows the target to "resist normal fire for a maximum of 2 melee rounds," while resist cold allows one to resist freezing temperatures "while the effects of the spell last," which is 6 turns. Granted, there's a common sense difference between mere freezing temperatures and fire but, still, I find it noteworthy that resist fire is a better spell. Of course, it's also 2nd-level, so perhaps that explains it.

Silence, 15' Radius functions as in Supplement, but includes a note that conversation is impossible while under its effects. No mention is made of its effect on spellcasting, although there's good reason to assume, based on other passages, that it would negate it as well. Both snake charm and speak with animals follow OD&D.

Holmes continues the tradition of giving evil clerics (no longer called "anti-clerics") reversed versions of several spells. The implication of the text -- "Evil clerics have basically the same spells as do good clerics. However, spells in italics are reversed for evil clerics." -- is that evil clerics cannot cast, for example, cure light wounds at all, being limited to cause light wounds instead. The list of reversed spells is the same in Holmes as in the LBBs, although the spells are explicitly given names here (Curse as the reverse of bless, for example). What's interesting is that, while there's no reversed version of protection from evil included, there is a detect good. I find this intriguing as detect evil detects only "evil thought or intent," a description that could be viewed in a relative fashion, with "evil" meaning only "antagonistic." That doesn't seem to be the case here, although, honestly, it's hard to tell just what detect good would detect and what use that knowledge would be to an evil cleric. In any case, it's further evidence that, by the time of Holmes at least, alignment had undergone enough permutations of meaning that it was on its way to becoming incoherent, both mechanically and as a game world construction.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part VII)

Today we take a look at magic-user spells. Holmes only details 1st and 2nd-level spells but he includes a list of 3rd-level spells "to give some idea of the range of magical possibilities." His list of 1st-level spells is identical to that found in Greyhawk but with the addition of three new spells: dancing lights, enlargement, and Tenser's floating disc, all three of which I presume were additions by Gygax or someone else at TSR intended to act as previews of material in the upcoming PHB. His list of 2nd-level spells is similarly identical to that in Supplement I but with the addition of ray of enfeeblement. The list of 3rd-level spells is the same in both books.

Charm person follows Greyhawk in using the target's Intelligence as a factor determining how often it gets a chance to break free from the spell's effects. The spell description also converts OD&D inches directly into feet, just as all the other spell descriptions in the book. In this way, Holmes is a precursor to Moldvay rather than AD&D, which retains the wargame-derived inches notations.

Dancing lights, as noted above, is new to Holmes. Detect magic is identical to OD&D. Enlargement is also a new spell, but it's much more limited in its explicit mechanical effects than is its AD&D counterpart enlarge, which specifically notes that larger creatures do more damage, etc. Hold portal is nearly identical to OD&D, right down to its reference to balrogs. Light is interesting, because, while it's listed as having a range of "120 feet," its description states that it casts "light in a circle 3" in diameter" -- a clear case where Holmes didn't expunge all references to inches in his text. Magic missile differences have already been noted here.

Protection from evil follows OD&D, right down to its twin role as a ward against "enchanted monsters, here explained as "elementals, invisible stalkers, demons, etc." and as "armor" against "evil attacks," but without any explanation of whether "evil" means "those of evil alignment" or simply "those opposed to the caster."

Read languages retains OD&D's focus on deciphering treasure maps rather than, well, unknown tongues, which has always confused me. Read magic also follows OD&D, although it clarifies that its use is primarily for deciphering scrolls. Shield is straight out of Supplement I, while sleep is identical to OD&D, with the clarifications found in Greyhawk. Tenser's floating disc is completely new and is the first time Ernie Gygax's PC is mentioned in a D&D product so far as I know. Ventriloquism is identical to the spell in Supplement I.

Audible glamer is new to Holmes. Continual light follows OD&D, while darkness follows Greyhawk. Detect evil continues to be divorced from alignment considerations, detecting instead "evil thought or intent," which I've always liked. Detect invisible and ESP follow OD&D, right down to the comic book-inspired impenetrability to lead of the latter spell. Invisibility is as in OD&D, except without any reference to the Chainmail rules. Knock and Levitate follow OD&D as well. Locate Object is as in OD&D and magic mouth is as in Supplement I. Mirror image likewise follows Supplement I, while phantasmal forces stays true to the LBBs. Pyrotechnics is identical to Greyhawk. Ray of enfeeblement is new, but strength follows Supplement I, omitting only the references to exceptional Strength for fighting men, as Holmes does not include it in his rules. Web is given an actual description in Holmes, instead of referring one to the staff of wizardry, as in OD&D. In addition, the range has been shortened to 10 feet from 30. Wizard lock is the same as in the LBBs.

What's most notable about Holmes's descriptions of magic-user spells is how similar they are to what's in OD&D and Supplement I, to the point where large amounts of text are the same in both. Holmes seems primarily to have corrected infelicities in phrasing, but he didn't remove all ambiguities, instead leaving these to the referee to adjudicate. What he primarily added, with the exception of his interpretation of magic missile, were ranges and durations for spells that lacked them in OD&D so that there's a uniformity of presentation. But his spells retain OD&D's terseness, even when doing so fails to eliminate all questions about how to interpret certain aspects of a spell (such as illusions, for example).

Reading through the magic-user spells in Holmes, it's very hard to see it as an introduction to AD&D, whose spell descriptions is expansive in a way that you never see in either the LBBs or the Blue Book.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part VI)

The general description of "magic" -- meaning the "workings of a magic-user" -- in Holmes has much of interest, so I'll quote a large section of the text here:

The magic-user acquires books containing the spells, the study of which allows him to memorize a spell for use. He can then throw the spell by saying the magic words and making gestures with his hands. This means that a magic-user bound and gagged can not use his magic. In some cases the spell may require substances or apparatus, such as conjuring a water elemental (5th level) requires the presence of water, a sleep spell requires a pinch of sand. A magic-user must concentrate on his spell, so he can not cast a spell and walk or run at the same time, and he certainly can not cast a spell while engaged in combat. Then, after all that, the spell may not work!

There's lots of information to digest in this paragraph. I'll begin only by noting that I'm personally amused by the appearance of the verb "throw" in reference to casting spells, a usage I see a lot in earlier gaming materials but that seems to have been superseded (The same usage also occurs in reference to dice too).

Holmes elaborates greatly on the in-game mechanics of magic, noting that spells require what AD&D calls "verbal" and "somatic" components to function. I wonder, given this and his reference to a bound and gagged magic-user, if this wasn't the beginning of the notion that the 2nd-level cleric spell, silence 15' radius, could be used as an offensive spell to shut down enemy spellcasters. Holmes notes too that some spells require "material" components, but, despite his examples, the descriptions for spells introduced later make no mention of material components. The requirement for absolute concentration is one that I've retained all these years and has colored my vision of how magic operates. His reference to spells not working "while engaged in combat" must be read with reference to the note about concentration: a magic-user actively fighting, as opposed to casting spells from a safe distance, lacks the focus needed to work magic.

Spell memorization is fleshed out slightly. The text notes that "as the spell is recited it fades from the spell-caster's mind and he can not use it again!" Re-memorization "takes at least 1 day" and, for unexplained reasons, "Magic-users can not bring their magic books into the dungeon with them." As a younger person, I took this to mean that spell books were tomes of immense size and weight, since spells were complex formulas, but Holmes nowhere explains his meaning.

Perhaps one of the best-known idiosyncrasies of the Holmes rulebook is its rules for scroll use and creation. Under these rules, magic-users of any level can make scrolls of spells they already know at a cost of 100 gp per spell level and 1 week's work, a rule I've used for years and that I allow in my Dwimmermount campaign. As Jeff notes, scrolls are specifically usable only by magic-users in Holmes, which raises some issues I'll discuss in a later post in this series. Spell research is also possible for magic-users, at a cost of 2000 gold piece per level of the spell and one week time, seemingly regardless of level. This expenditure grants a mere 20% chance of success, however, so researching even a new 1st-level spell may take much gold and many weeks. The level of any new spell under research is determined by the referee, of course, as with so much in Holmes.

Holmes includes Supplement I's "Chance to Know Any Given Spell" table based on the magic-user's Intelligence score. He also includes an actual explanation for how the table works, which is nice, since the Greyhawk table is quite mysterious on its own. I'll admit that I've always liked this table, as it gives magic a weird quality to it. There are some spells that are simply impenetrable to a given character and no amount of trying will enable his mind to grasp them.

Holmes uses the same saving throw categories as the LBBs, more or less, although his wand category doesn't explicitly include "polymorph and paralization [sic]" as OD&D does. They are, however, in a different order. Except for the fact that he groups thieves with fighting men rather than magic-users as in OD&D, the tables are functionally identical to those in the LBBs. Monsters are treated as fighting men of equal level in most cases, except for those whose magic use suggests they ought to be treated as either magic-users or clerics. Holmes also alludes to the existence of magic resistance for "large and powerful creatures like demons, balrogs and dragons." He also reiterates the traditional resistances of undead beings to sleep and charm type spells.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part V)

Holmes grants XP on the basis of "treasure obtained or monsters killed or subdued," just like OD&D. The XP value of monsters is determined using a chart that's almost identical to that in Supplement I. Interestingly, Holmes makes the following allowance:

If, for some reason, one character gets more of the loot, such as a thief stealing gems from the saddle bags on the way home, then he should get the additional experience points.

Again, this passage rings a lot of bells for me, since it's how I used to play back in the day. It seems to be unique to Holmes, or at least it doesn't seem to derive from anything in the LBBs, but someone can correct me if I'm wrong on this score. That said, Holmes also allows for the referee to lower the number of XP awarded to duplicitous characters, such as one who "sneaks out of the dungeon with all the treasure while the rest of the party is being eaten." Holmes reiterates OD&D's prohibition against gaining more than one level at a time, regardless of how much XP is earned in an adventure. He also clarifies how hit points are determined, thereby denying that the approach taken in Empire of the Petal Throne is in fact normative. Further thoughts on Holmes and XP can be read here.

The XP charts for character classes in Holmes are interesting. The required XP per level for each of the four classes is the same as in OD&D and hit dice are as per Greyhawk. Level titles are present but not explained (and a 3rd-level cleric is now merely a "priest," as opposed to "village priest."). Magic-user spell progression has changed slightly at 3rd level, with such characters now getting only two 1st-level spells and one 2nd-level spell rather than three 1st-level spells and one 2nd-level one. Thief abilities are identical to those in Supplement I (i.e. no find traps ability) and at the same percentages. Thieves of 3rd level and above are noted as being able to "read magic scrolls and books," in addition to "80% of languages," which is a bit confusing compared to Greyhawk. One could make the case that Holmes was allowing 3rd-level thieves to cast spells from scrolls, but I rather suspect what he wrote is the result of an imprecision in his text rather than changing the circumstances under which thieves can cast spells. Thieves are explicitly given exactly one chance per level to open a specific lock. If they fail, they cannot try again until their chance to succeed increases.

Most fascinating of all is that elves are listed as sharing the same experience table as fighting men, halflings, and dwarves, but are not also listed under the table for magic-users. This is particularly strange given that he notes in a paragraph below the tables that elves "progress in two areas" and "use a six-sided die for hits." Halflings, meanwhile, though fighting men, use only a D6 per level for hit points.

Clerical turning works identically to OD&D, using the exact same chart. It also retains OD&D's 2d6 roll to determine the number of undead turned rather than the number of hit dice turned, as in Moldvay (which, in this case, is the outlier, as AD&D more or less follows OD&D on this point).

The many meanings of "level" are discussed at some length, but without anything that won't be repeated again and again over the years. Holmes lays down the classical form of this discussion.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part IV)

"Time and Movement in the Dungeons" contains some interesting deviations from OD&D. In both the LBBs and Holmes, a turn is 10 minutes long. In both games, all armored characters, regardless of whether they wear leather armor or plate, move at the same rate, which is 120 feet per turn (though, to be fair, the LBBs are clearer on this point, because they provide encumbrance values for each armor type).

However, Holmes states that, in combat, "there are ten melee rounds per turn, each round lasting ten seconds." In OD&D, a round is 1 minute long. Holmes has muddied the waters somewhat but making the term "turn" equivocal, sometimes referring to what I guess we can call a "movement turn" and sometimes referring to what we might call a "combat turn," each having a different temporal value. It's a bit frustrating and its presence probably explains why, to this day, I instinctively think of a "round" as being 10 seconds long, which it is not in AD&D (though it is in Moldvay, interestingly). Holmes follows OD&D in assuming that one (move) turn each hour must be spent in rest.

Holmes notes that "DUNGEONS & DRAGONS was originally written for wargamers" in order to explain why distances are frequently written in inches. However, nearly every (all?) examples where distances are noted, such as in spell descriptions or monster movement rates, he uses standard measurements rather than inches, a practice continued in Moldvay but not in AD&D.

Encumbrance rules are present, but they are extremely vague. No weight values are assigned to equipment, so each referee would need to decide for himself the weight of each item. The LBBs include such information, however. Despite this omission, Holmes nevertheless suggests that players keep a careful record of all the equipment their characters are carrying, including where on their person they're keeping it. A sample character, Malchor the Magic-User, is used as an example of how to do this and I find it noteworthy that the text says he wears "boots, loin cloth, robe, girdle, and pointy hat."

I've already covered most of what needs to be said about light in the dungeon here. I'll add only that Holmes explains that dwarves and elves "lose their ability to see 60 feet [in the dark] if there is light within 30 feet of them."

Traps function identically to OD&D (triggering on a 1-2 on 1D6). Doors also follow OD&D, being usually closed and forced open on a roll of 1-2 on 1D6, though Holmes includes no suggestion that "lighter characters" open doors only on a roll of 1. Doors automatically close unless spiked/wedged, but always open for monsters unless specifically prevented from doing so. Holmes does not include rules for spikes slipping free, as OD&D does. Listening at doors follows the LBBs (roll of 1 on 1D6 for humans and 1-2 for demihumans), with undead making no sound.

Surprise is handled identically in both (1-2 on 1D6), although Holmes lessens the possibility that a surprised character may drop whatever he is holding.

Wandering monsters are rarer in Holmes, as the referee only checks for them once every three turns as opposed to once every turn. Again, this is a Holmes-ism that I instinctively follow and have had to work hard to correct in my mind. Holmes also provides a clearer, almost formulaic approach to determining how many wandering monsters are "appropriate" for a given dungeon and party level than is found in OD&D, although he's not really deviating from the LBBs. However, his wandering monsters can appear farther away (20-120 feet) than in OD&D (20-80 feet).

Fascinatingly, Holmes includes an expanded "Hostile/Friendly Reaction Table" for dealing with monsters compared to OD&D. It's still a 2D6 roll but it offers finer grained results than that in Volume 3 of OD&D (and Moldvay's own table is almost wholly identically with that in Holmes). There's, again, a suggestion that the table results can be modified at the referee's discretion, taking into account Charisma, bribes, etc. There are also simple rules for evading pursuit by monsters that are similar to those in the LBBs but somewhat simplified mechanically.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part III)

Dr. Holmes has a short section discussing "hopeless characters," in which he suggests that, at the DM's discretion, a character who is "below average" might be "declared unsuitable for dangerous adventures and left at home." I find the section interesting, because I don't recall anything similar to it being included in the LBBs or Supplements. Perhaps I am reading too much into it, but this suggests to me that, by the time the Blue Book appeared, there was already a strong sense in some quarters of the hobby that PCs should be "above average," an opinion echoed in Gygax's PHB. Intriguingly, Holmes concludes this section with what I consider sage advice on the subject:

There is enough chance in the dungeon encounters, however, that sometimes a character like this will survive and advance to a position of power and importance.

That single sentence encapsulate a lot of what I consider to be the essence of old school gaming. Ability scores are not destiny, especially in the LBBs and Holmes, where their mechanical effect is negligible. Moreover, D&D is a game of chance, which means that, even an above average character might well suffer a bad roll that brings him to a bad end, while a supposedly "hopeless" character not only survives but prospers. Some of my fondest early gaming memories are of characters with thoroughly mediocre ability scores who outlived their better endowed peers to become pillars of the campaign.

Holmes suggests that players be allowed no more than two characters at a time in the campaign and notes that most DMs allow only one per player. OD&D's inheritance rules, complete with the 10% tax, are mentioned, along with the possibility that a player might simply choose to retire "wealthy and covered in glory" before his luck runs out and he is slain in the dungeon. In discussing character death, removing the miniature figure that represents him from the table is explicitly mentioned, suggesting again that miniatures, while not necessary, were treated as a commonplace aspect of the game. Attention is drawn to raising the dead through magic, in which it's stated that "A seventh level cleric can raise the dead, if you can find one!" This implies that 7th level is a noteworthy and rare achievement and that the campaign should not include many such characters.

The Blue Book assumes that the player characters will hire NPCs to join them in their dungeon delving, although, as with most things in Holmes, the decision to allow or disallow this possibility rests with the referee. That said, there are rules for recruiting hirelings, albeit of a very loose sort. Unlike OD&D, where there are explicit game mechanics associated with Charisma, Holmes is more "free form" and relying on the good judgment and creativity of the Dungeon Master.

Holmes differs from OD&D in adopting a fivefold alignment system (Lawful Good, Lawful Evil, Neutral, Chaotic Good, Chaotic Evil), which first appeared in Strategic Review #6 (February 1976). Neutrality is equated not with balance here but with self-interest, with thieves being offered as prime examples of the alignment. Alignment change is noted as a possibility, but one that brings with it the loss of experience points as a penalty. Alignment languages are present in Holmes, as they are in OD&D. Learning other languages is a function of Intelligence and the formula for determining the exact number of languages a character can learn is identical to that in the LBBs.

Blue Book, Cover to Cover (Part II)

The Blue Book also include a brief introduction in which Dr. Holmes notes that D&D is "a fantastic, exciting and imaginative game of role playing for adults 12 years and up." I don't recall reading this as a kid, being more drawn to the box cover, which didn't specify "12 years and up." With this qualification, the rulebook is aimed at exactly the same audience as the Moldvay set released in 1981.

The introduction notes that players "create their own map as they explore," which is important, in my opinion, as it emphasizes the exploratory nature of dungeon delving. Miniature figures are mentioned several times, both in the introduction and in the "How to use This Book" sections. The text says

The game is more exciting and spectacular using the lead miniature figures mentioned above, which can be painted to each player's individual taste, but paper markers or chessmen can be used effectively.

There's lots of evidence, as we'll see, that Holmes didn't think miniatures were necessary for play, but their presence, if only in a very abstract form, seems to have nevertheless been assumed as the default for most groups.

Holmes offers only 3D6 in order as a means of a character's abilities. Choice of class should be influenced by the results of the 3D6 rolls but is not bound by them. Strength has no mechanical purpose in Holmes other than as a fighting man's prime requisite. Intelligence grants knowledge of additional languages, as well as being the magic-user's prime requisite. Wisdom serves only as the cleric's prime requisite, just like Strength. So far, the abilities function exactly as in the LBBs. Constitution grants bonuses to hit dice rolls, as per Supplement I. Dexterity serves as the prime requisite for thieves and grants as bonus to hit with missiles, as in the LBBs. Although mention is made in the description of Charisma of followers and their loyalty, there are no actual rules to handle this in Holmes. It's worth noting that Holmes follows the order of abilities given in OD&D, with CON coming before DEX, rather than the reverse as in AD&D.

Prime requisite scores can adjusted upwards by sacrificing points from other abilities. The exact formulas by which points from one ability get converted into points from another varies by ability and by class, but it's generally at a ration of 2-for-1 or 3-for-1. These formulas are generally the same as those in OD&D but there are some exceptions, such as clerics no longer being able to lower Strength to gain Wisdom, for example. DEX cannot be lowered but it can be raised by thieves. CON and CHA cannot be altered at all. Unlike in OD&D, where it's implied in at least one case that these alterations to ability scores apply only to earned XP, there's no such implication in Holmes.

Character classes available are fighting men, magic-users, clerics, and thieves. All four are described as being primarily human classes, though it is noted that dwarves, elves, and halflings may be thieves, though no rules for this are presented. Instead, the reader is referred to AD&D, so it's a bit of an option question as to whether Holmes support demihuman thief characters. Demihumans throughout the text are generally treated as fighting men, although elves are noted as being "a combination of fighting man and magic-user." Thieves must be either neutral or evil in alignment, but the other three classes may be of any alignment.

Dwarves have infravision, while elves merely "see ... in the dark." Elves are also immune to ghoul paralysis, something not mentioned in OD&D. Elves in Holmes seem to function somewhat like a proto-AD&D multiclass character, but the text is unclear.

Elves progress in level as both fighting men and magic-uses, but since each game nets them experience in both categories equally, they progress more slowly than other characters.

I would assume this means that XP is divided equally between the two classes but I can imagine someone arguing that that's not the case. I wouldn't allow such an interpretation in my campaign, however. Complicating matters further is that elves use D6 for hit dice, though it's never specified when an elf gets new hit dice, since they have two classes. Halflings, despite being fighting men, get only D6 for hit dice, owing to their small size, thus opening up the notion that hit points represent, at least in part, body mass. Holmes uses Greyhawk-style hit dice and allows for 1-3 hit points regained per day of rest as opposed to OD&D's mere 1.

The list of equipment and weapons in Holmes is identical to that in OD&D, right down to the prices and the inclusion of wooden and silver crosses rather than more generic "holy symbols."

Under "Additional Character Classes," Holmes explains that AD&D introduces more character classes and races. These include half-elves (but not gnomes or half-orcs), paladins, rangers, illusionists, monks, druids, assassins, and witches. Mention of the latter class is original to Holmes, as Gygax denied in various places that there were ever plans for a witch class in AD&D. I can only presume, given Holmes's mention shortly afterward of "a Japanese samurai fighting man" that he was assuming that some of the classes in the pages of The Dragon at the time, of which the witch was one, might make it into AD&D. There's also mention of psionics and the possibility of unusual character types at the DM's discretion.