I'm way to young to have played the first edition. Although I would have liked to. ^,=,^
I played it some...and no, you wouldn't have. Way too rough and vague and conflicted, by comparison. 2nd ed's initial intent was mainly to clean up a lot of that, and document the more popular ways that fans had 'fixed' the roughness of the rules. (Well, OK, it also had to do with undercutting Dave Arneson's IP legal challenge, but that is another, older story.)
Ok, I have unusally noobish question: does Fortress Shield +3 add +11AC bonus vs. missiles or +7AC bonus vs. missiles? Description says it gives +4 regular AC bonus and +7 extra AC bonus vs. missiles, but does these bonuses actually stack?
Ok, I have unusally noobish question: does Fortress Shield +3 add +11AC bonus vs. missiles or +7AC bonus vs. missiles? Description says it gives +4 regular AC bonus and +7 extra AC bonus vs. missiles, but does these bonuses actually stack?
@elminster so basically if item has two AC bonus opcodes applied, one for regular AC bonus and second one for AC bonus vs. specific type of weapons, does these bonuses always stack? Or maybe there are some various opcodes that grant AC bonus, which work differently?
Generally speaking I'm going to say yes, though I'm sure there is some exception out there (given how many items there are in the series). Even armors typically have their main AC and then separate effects for AC vs different types that apply bonuses/penalties appropriately.
@Cahir - It depends on the wording. If it says "...an extra +X..." or "...an additional +Y...", then they stack.
For example, the fortress shield is "Armor Class: +4, an additional +7 vs. missile attacks". So, in that case, they stack.
However, if the wording is "Armor Class: +X, +Y vs. missile attacks", then they don't stack.
For example, in BG1EE, there is a large shield, SHLD02P, with the description "Armor Class: +1, +2 vs. missile attacks". Here, they do not stack. It is essentially the same as "Armor Class: +1, and additional +1 vs. missile attacks".
What loot do you gain from completing Anomen's quest? Anything worth picking him up to complete his quest for?
Uhm, nothing worth doing so, but you can come back later (after finishing the Quest in the good way) and loot everything, you can kill everyone but two Commoners in the lowest floor without loosing any Reputation Points, if you are willing to meta-game like this.
I don't know, probably some gold, maybe one or two magical weapons (not uniques), I only had Anomen once in my party and I looted that building only a few times.
@Cershen I don't know much about the lore, but would that be considered a title that is given, rather than something you just obtain once becoming a specific level of power?
According to D&D lore, what level must a mage reach to be considered an arch-mage?
In 1st Edition AD&D, magic-users of 18th level earned the level title "Arch-mage". This is the level at which he/she can cast 9th level spells.
2nd edition dropped the level titles; AFAIK there is no formal definition of one based on levels. But, I'd assume that many would have carried the definition over from 1st edition, since, again, 18th is when the wizard gets access to 9th level spells.
3rd edition made Archmage a prestige class that requires the ability to cast 7th level arcane spells, i.e. you'd need to have a minimum of 13 levels of Wizard before being eligible for the Archmage prestige class. So, an archmage has to be at least 14th level in 3E (13 Wizard/1 Archmage).
@Sergio You don't even have to be evil. You can kill them and everything plays out exactly the same, only you actually get the satisfaction of ending their lives.
As @Elrandir said. Why give the experience to the dopplegangers, when you can collect it too? I also use to collect every moveable object from the keep, can't let these monsters desecrate the memory of my childhood!
Comments
Way too rough and vague and conflicted, by comparison. 2nd ed's initial intent was mainly to clean up a lot of that, and document the more popular ways that fans had 'fixed' the roughness of the rules.
(Well, OK, it also had to do with undercutting Dave Arneson's IP legal challenge, but that is another, older story.)
For example, the fortress shield is "Armor Class: +4, an additional +7 vs. missile attacks". So, in that case, they stack.
However, if the wording is "Armor Class: +X, +Y vs. missile attacks", then they don't stack.
For example, in BG1EE, there is a large shield, SHLD02P, with the description "Armor Class: +1, +2 vs. missile attacks". Here, they do not stack. It is essentially the same as "Armor Class: +1, and additional +1 vs. missile attacks".
2nd edition dropped the level titles; AFAIK there is no formal definition of one based on levels. But, I'd assume that many would have carried the definition over from 1st edition, since, again, 18th is when the wizard gets access to 9th level spells.
3rd edition made Archmage a prestige class that requires the ability to cast 7th level arcane spells, i.e. you'd need to have a minimum of 13 levels of Wizard before being eligible for the Archmage prestige class. So, an archmage has to be at least 14th level in 3E (13 Wizard/1 Archmage).