Confounded Rules! Some Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Rules Examined
- R. Nelson Bailey
- Mar 6, 2022
- 22 min read
Updated: 1 hour ago
This article takes a look at some of the more problematic rules found in First Edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons.
By R. Nelson Bailey
First Edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (AD&D) is a wondrous game that has left an indelible mark on those who’ve played it — this author included. Yet its quirky, idiosyncratic rulebooks can be difficult to navigate, even for veteran players. Editing issues run throughout, leaving readers unsure of what the rules actually mean. Common problems include vague wording, omissions, typos, inconsistencies, contradictions, and rules scattered across different sections of a book — or even across multiple books.
Complicating matters further, later books and magazine articles sometimes add, expand, or revise earlier material. Combined with the differences between multiple editions of D&D and the widespread use of house rules, this confusion only multiplies. This article examines some of the more overlooked and vexing aspects of First Edition AD&D to help Dungeon Masters (DMs) and players alike make better sense of the game.
If you haven’t yet, check out this article’s companion piece, Again, Confounded Rules! It examines more of AD&D’s trickier rules and dispels the confusion.
5th-Level Cleric Level Title
A glance at the “Clerics Table I” in the Players Handbook shows that a 5th-level cleric has no level title — just a blank space.[1] What’s going on here? Do 5th-level clerics really not have a title? Is it meant to be the same as the 4th level? Or is it simply a typo? The answer is that it is, in fact, a typo. The missing title is actually Prefect, as listed on the AD&D REF1 Dungeon Masters Screen.[2]
This title also appears as Prefect in T1-4 Temple of Elemental Evil [3] and the super-module GDQ1-7 Queen of the Spiders.[4] On the earlier Dungeon Masters Screen from 1979 (the one with the Erol Otus cover art, not the revised REF1 from 1985), the word is even misspelled as “Perfect.” How perfectly ironic.
A Natural 20 Always Succeeds
In First Edition AD&D, rolling a natural 20 in combat is not a guaranteed hit like it is in later editions — nor is a natural 1 an automatic miss. In some cases, an attack lands only if the die roll plus modifiers meets or exceeds the required target number, which can sometimes be higher than 20.[5] This makes certain opponents effectively “hit proof.” [6]
Saving throws, however, work differently. A natural 1 always fails, and (optionally) a natural 20 always succeeds.[7]
For comparison, the Moldvay “Basic” D&D rules specifically state that “a roll of a 20 will always hit, and a roll of 1 will always miss.” [8]
Armor & Spellcasting
An oft-repeated rationale for why magic-users cannot wear armor is that it somehow “spoils” their spells. The Second Edition AD&D Players Handbook even addresses this rumor directly.[9] In truth, this is a case of misattribution. It is druids — not magic-users — whose spells are spoiled by wearing metallic armor.[10]
The Players Handbook states plainly that magic-users cannot wear armor or use most weapons because martial training is “foreign to magic-use.” [11] Simple as that. Well… that, and game balance… and keeping the classes distinct.
Carrion Crawler Paralysis
The Monster Manual fails to specify the duration of a carrion crawler’s paralysis attack. To complicate matters further, various official sources contradict one another. The AD&D Monster Cards, Set 3, lists the duration as 2d6 turns,[12] and T1-4 Temple of Elemental Evil gives it as 1d4+1 turns.[13] Meanwhile, Dispel Confusion states the effect lasts 5d4 rounds.[14]
The best “official” answer is the 2d6 turns duration from the AD&D Monster Cards, Set 3. The rationale comes from Dragon Issue 61, which explained that the Monster Cards allowed TSR to publish official corrections to errors and omissions in the Monster Manual.[15]
Cold Iron
The rulebooks state that bodaks, ghasts, quasits, wolfweres, and demons can be harmed by cold-wrought iron weapons. Yet the rulebooks never define these weapons or explain how they differ from ordinary iron.
Dispel Confusion clarifies that cold-wrought iron is “iron which is shaped without heat, generally by pounding and filing.” [16] However, such weapons are weaker than forged ones, prone to bending and breaking with use.
The rules governing illusion spells in First Edition AD&D are very loose — more rough guidelines than hard rules.
Deadly Illusions
The rules governing illusion spells in First Edition AD&D are very loose — more rough guidelines than hard rules. Inevitably, this leads to a mare’s nest of questions from DMs and players alike. One of the most common: Can an illusion kill a character?
Some conclude that the answer is yes, since the vagueness of the rules leaves much open to interpretation. First, though, we need to clarify which illusions we’re talking about. Here, it’s the phantasmal force family of spells. This group includes phantasmal force, improved phantasmal force, spectral force, advanced illusion, programmed illusion, and phantasmagoria. It also covers magical devices that create illusions (such as a wand of illusion or deck of illusions) and monster spell-like abilities, such as those created by devils.
It does not include illusion-based spells like phantasmal killer, demi-shadow magic, demi-shadow monsters, shadow magic, or shadow monsters.
These open-ended illusion spells let a caster create nearly anything they can imagine. They vanish if struck (unless the caster is concentrating), and they do not affect victims who successfully disbelieve them.[17] A spellcaster might use these spells to conjure an avalanche, a fireball, or even a hill giant. While formidable, however, such illusions cannot actually kill their targets. Instead, “slain” victims are placed into a “cataleptic state.” [18]
Unfortunately, the rules never define what a “cataleptic state” actually is. As noted in Dragon Magazine, the Dungeon Masters Guide rules on unconscious characters are the closest fit for handling this condition. [19] [20]
A final note: Illusions do not affect non-intelligent (0 INT) creatures, such as dinosaurs[21] and undead.[22]
Demi-Human Base Move
Say you need to know how fast your dwarf character moves. You flip through the rulebooks, and the only place you find it mentioned is in the Monster Manual, where a dwarf’s Movement Rate is listed as 6”.[23] That seems low — but hey, they do have short legs.
The problem is that the Movement Rates in the Monster Manual aren’t fully accurate. Demi-human and humanoid stats in that book represent adult fighting types, so their Armor Class and Movement Rate assume they are outfitted in armor. For dwarves and gnomes, chain mail is the usual choice.[24] Their listed Movement Rate is therefore adjusted downward to reflect the weight and bulk of the armor.[25]
In reality, the base Movement of demi-humans and humanoids is higher when not wearing armor. Unfortunately, no AD&D rulebook provides these figures. An official list did, however, appear in Polyhedron, and it seems quite satisfactory.[26] It gives the following Movement Rates for unarmored humans and demi-humans:
dwarf = 9”
elf = 12”
gnome = 9”
halfling = 9”
half-elf = 12”
half-orc = 12”
human = 12”
Dragon Breath Damage
Dragon breath has long been a source of confusion in First Edition AD&D. The problem stems from an ambiguous line on p. 30 of the Monster Manual: “The breath weapon causes damage equal to the dragon’s hit points.”
Does this mean the damage equals the dragon’s maximum hit points? Or is it based on the dragon’s current hit points, as in the “Basic” D&D game?
The example under “Subduing a Dragon” below clears this up. There, adventurers inflict 44 hit points of damage on an 88-hit-point red dragon in the first round. On the second round, the dragon breathes — and deals 88 hit points of damage. From this, it is clear that dragon breath damage equals the dragon’s maximum hit points.[27] Dispel Confusion later confirmed this ruling.[28]
While on the subject, the breath weapons of Good-aligned dragons create additional magical effects — such as sleep, slow, or repulsion — that stack with their damage. These secondary effects are non-lethal, which creates a logical problem: why would a brass dragon’s sleep breath also deal damage if its intent is merely to incapacitate? The Monster Manual (and other AD&D rulebooks) never address this issue.[29]
Interestingly, the Holmes “Basic” D&D rules explicitly state that the brass dragon’s sleep and fear breath weapons cause only the magical effects, not damage.[30]
Exceptional Strength
The Players Handbook clearly states that fighters are the only class to possess exceptional (percentile) Strength.[31] But is this really the case? The problem is that the wording is misleading. The text explicitly says “fighters” without mentioning the fighter sub-classes — namely, the paladin and ranger. Does this mean those classes do not gain exceptional Strength?
Regardless of the phrasing, the answer is yes: both paladins[32] and rangers are entitled to exceptional Strength. Broadly speaking, this is because sub-classes are treated as part of their parent class — paladins and rangers are fighters, just as illusionists are magic-users and druids are clerics.[33] Each sub-class gains all the fundamental abilities of its parent class unless its description specifically says otherwise.
For example, under the Constitution ability, the “Hit Point Adjustment” section states that the higher bonuses for a 17 or 18 Constitution apply to fighters, including the fighter sub-classes paladins and rangers.” [34] This provides a strong rationale, though not a definitive rule on its own.
A conclusive answer appears in Unearthed Arcana, where a multi-classed cleric/ranger is explicitly noted to have exceptional Strength.[35] Additionally, The Rogues Gallery lists multiple paladins and rangers with exceptional Strength scores, leaving little room for doubt.[36]
Falling Damage
Falling damage in most editions, including First Edition AD&D, is 1d6 per 10 feet fallen, up to a maximum of 20d6. It says so right there on p. 105 of the Players Handbook. No issues here, right? Well… not so fast.
Yes, the rule does state that plainly, and that’s how most groups have played it for over four decades. But five years after the Players Handbook was published, Gary Gygax officially revised the rule. He explained that his original notes on falling damage had been incorrectly edited.[37]
The text should have read: “1d6 per 10’ fallen, cumulative…the damage mounts geometrically: 2d6 for the second 10 feet fallen, 3d6 for the third 10 feet, etc.” [38]
This corrected version of the rule was later included in an official AD&D rulebook, the Dungeoneers Survival Guide.[39]
Ghoul & Ghast Paralysis
As with the carrion crawler, the Monster Manual gives no duration for the paralysis touch of ghouls and ghasts. Once again, multiple official sources provide conflicting answers (I discuss these in more depth in the article The Ghoulish Touch).
The most reliable ruling is 2d6 turns, as given in the AD&D Monster Cards, Set 1.[40] The reasoning is the same as for the carrion crawler: the Monster Cards were published to serve as official corrections to errors and omissions in the Monster Manual.[41]
Helmet Use
An often-overlooked rule in First Edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons concerns the consequences of not wearing a helmet. Any time a helmetless character is attacked, a d6 is rolled. If the die shows a “1,” the character is struck in the head, which is considered Armor Class 10.[42]
While this rule makes sense, I’ve never used it, nor have I met anyone who has. It would require rolling both a d6 and a d20 every time a helmetless character is attacked. By the letter of the rules, a DM would also have to apply it to all melee attacks against magic-users and monks, since those classes cannot wear armor. (Helmets are considered armor, as they appear under the “Armor” heading in the Players Handbook equipment lists.)
Note: The Dungeon Masters Guide states that a great helm gives a wearer’s head “AC 1.” In practice, this means the great helm applies a –1 Armor Class bonus to the head only.[43]
Item Saving Throws
Fireballs, dragon breath, disintegration, falling off a cliff, the electrical blast of a glyph of warding — when these destructive attack forms strike characters, the items they carry must also save or be destroyed. These rules are spelled out on pp. 80–81 of the Dungeon Masters Guide.
It is surprising how few DMs actually enforce this rule. Perhaps it’s because they don’t want to endure the howls of disbelief from stunned players as their favorite magic items are burned, smashed, or shattered. As I’ve often said, “Players would rather have their characters die than lose all their stuff.”
Second Edition AD&D adds a caveat not present in First Edition: carried items only need to save if the character fails their own saving throw against the attack form.[44]
Level Limits
First Edition AD&D places restrictions on the highest level a demi-human character can achieve.[45] Humans, however, face no such limits; they can advance to any level in any class.[46] Since the goal of the game is to increase in level and power, why must demi-humans abide by these seemingly arbitrary restrictions?
The primary reason is game balance. Demi-human races possess special advantages — enhanced vision, detection abilities, saving throw bonuses, and the ability to multi-class — that give them a strong edge over humans, especially at lower levels. These benefits are noted across multiple publications.[47] [48] [49] Without level caps, few players would choose to play humans.
Another reason is thematic: Dungeons & Dragons was always envisioned as existing within a human-centric world, modeled after the folklore, mythology, and fantasy tales that inspired the game.[50] [51] [52] Because the players themselves are human, they can more easily relate to human motivations and sensibilities. Within the game’s rationale, humans are presumed to be more adaptable than demi-humans and humanoids, which gives them a broader range of possibilities for advancement.[53]
Thus, humans’ drive to succeed and their inherent potential — for good or ill — is greater despite their apparent handicaps. This explains why a short-lived human can attain higher levels than a long-lived elf or dwarf.
Magic Bows
According to the Dungeon Masters Guide, arrows fired from a magic bow gain a +1 bonus “to hit” and to damage.[54] However, the text does not state whether a non-magical arrow fired from a magic bow can strike creatures that can only be harmed by magical weapons.
To find the answer, we have to look at similar magic item descriptions. In this case, the entry for the sling of seeking +2 specifies that missiles fired from it can strike creatures immune to normal weapons.[55] From this, it is reasonable to conclude that all magic weapons that fire ammunition share this property.
By comparison, “Basic” D&D (Moldvay, Mentzer) gives no clear ruling, while the Rules Cyclopedia explicitly states that arrows fired from magical bows are considered magical.[56] Second Edition AD&D, however, rules the opposite — that arrows fired from a magical bow are not automatically magical.
Magical Aging
The Players Handbook states that petrified or polymorphed characters will die unless they make a successful System Shock Survival roll.[57] The same requirement also applies to magical aging.
This includes aging caused by the use of alter reality, gate, limited wish, restoration, resurrection, or wish; being the recipient of a haste spell; drinking a potion of speed; or being struck by a staff of withering.[58]
Aging attacks by monsters such as ghosts or time elementals, however, do not require a System Shock Survival roll, since these are not considered “magical” in nature.[59] Presumably, this potentially fatal penalty exists to discourage the overuse of these powerful magics.
Mind Flayer “Mind Blast” Ability
The mind flayer’s most feared ability is its mind blast. Yet the Monster Manual never describes exactly what this attack does, and no other First Edition rulebook clarifies it.[60]
In truth, the mind blast is simply the psionic attack psionic blast. To make matters worse, the Monster Manual also incorrectly lists the mind flayer’s psionic attack mode as “B” (mind thrust), when it should be “A” (psionic blast).[61]
The mind flayer’s most feared ability is its mind blast.
Monsters & Infravision
Many monsters in D&D inhabit lightless dungeons and caverns. A common question is: “How do these monsters see in such environments?”
The Dungeon Masters Guide sheds some light on this issue, noting that “most monsters inhabiting underground areas will have this form (i.e., 90’ range) of infravision.” [62] Unfortunately, the wording is ambiguous. It could mean:
Of those underground-dwelling monsters that possess infravision, most will have the 90’ variety.
Or, most monsters that live underground will have infravision, and its range will be 90’.
No definitive clarification was ever published. However, it seems reasonable to conclude the latter, since so few monsters in the manuals are explicitly given infravision. Only a handful of entries — mostly humanoids and demi-humans — list it at all. This was either an oversight or an attempt to avoid redundancy.
Note: The Players Handbook states that dungeon-dwelling monsters have “120’ infravision.” This contradicts the Dungeon Masters Guide. Since the latter was published later, it should take precedence.[63]
Movement During Melee
The rules for movement in melee in First Edition AD&D are, to put it mildly, less than clear. In many games I’ve played, melee movement was simply glossed over: as long as a move seemed reasonable, it was allowed. For players and DMs seeking precise rulings, however, one must dig across multiple books.
The Players Handbook states that creatures can move their Movement Rate × 10 in feet during a combat round.[64] For example, a character with a 12” Movement Rate can move up to 120 feet and still take an action. During surprise rounds, however, movement is measured per segment, at a rate equal to the Movement Rate in feet.[65]
Combat movement occurs on step 4.E of the combat round sequence — after missile discharge, but before melee attacks.[66]
By comparison, the “Basic” D&D rules (Moldvay) allow a character to move up to one-third of their Movement Rate in melee,[67] while Second Edition AD&D allows movement equal to the base Movement Rate × 10 feet in a single round.
Multi-Classed Characters
Determining which restrictions a multi-classed character must follow can be frustrating. The rulebooks often lack concise wording on specific details. Below are clarifications to some of the more common issues, drawn from official sources and published modules:
Starting money: Equal to the combined starting amounts for all classes.[68]
Weapon & nonweapon proficiencies: These are cumulative.[69]
Hit points: Divide rolled hit points between the classes. Fractions less than half round down; fractions greater than half round up.[70]
Saving throws: Use the most favorable saving throws of the character’s classes.[71]
Experience points: Always divided evenly between classes, even when one or more have reached their level limit.[72]
Class-specific Rulings
Multi-classed cleric: Can use edged weapons.[73] [74] (Contrast with Second Edition AD&D, where clerics must use blunt weapons only.)
Multi-classed fighter: May have exceptional Strength,[75] but cannot use weapon specialization.[76]
Multi-classed magic-user: Can use the weapons and armor of their other classes. Spellcasting is not prohibited while wearing armor.[77] [78] (Again, contrast Second Edition AD&D, where it is prohibited.)
Multi-classed thief: The Players Handbook states they must follow thief restrictions for weapons and armor.[79] Yet many published examples show otherwise (G1-2-3 Against the Giants, D2 Vault of the Drow, I11 Needle). Exception: Multi-classed half-orcs must use the least favorable type of armor.[80] Thieving abilities cannot be used when wearing armor or shields not permitted to thieves. This also prohibits backstabbing with weapons not normally usable by thieves.[81] [82]
Neutral Clerics & Turning
In the rules for turning undead, Good-aligned clerics are said to “turn” undead, while Evil clerics “command” them.[83] But the rules never explain what Neutral clerics do.[84] This omission has left many puzzled players wondering: “Do Neutral clerics turn undead, or command them?”
Since Neutral clerics are still clerics, they must possess some form of undead-affecting power. Nowhere in the rulebooks does it say — or even suggest — that they cannot. Yet official sources gave conflicting or incomplete answers. Sage Advice in Dragon provided no definitive ruling,[85] while Dispel Confusion in Polyhedron covered the question twice, giving contradictory solutions.[86]
The definitive answer appeared in Dragon Issue 103, in the article “Arcana Update, Part 1.” It states: “any non-evil cleric should be treated the same as a good cleric for purposes of determining the success and outcome of attempts to turn undead.” [87] In other words, Neutral clerics turn undead just like Good clerics.
The most likely reason for this oversight is historical. Neutral clerics did not exist prior to First Edition AD&D. In the original Dungeons & Dragons (“brown books”) and the Holmes “Basic” D&D rules, clerics could only be Good or Evil. Accordingly, they either turned or commanded undead. These rules used the “Three-Alignment” and “Five-Alignment” systems, where Lawful Neutral and Chaotic Neutral did not yet exist (they were simply “Lawful” and “Chaotic”).
The AD&D Players Handbook (1978) introduced the “Nine-Alignment” system, which allowed clerics of the Neutral alignment. Since this was a late addition in the game’s evolution, the turning rules in the Dungeon Masters Guide were likely never updated to address Neutral-aligned clerics.
Parrying
Another forgotten rule in First Edition AD&D is that a character can choose to parry an opponent’s attack. By doing so, the parrying character forfeits their attack but forces their opponent to subtract their Strength bonus “to hit” from the attack roll.[88]
One can easily see why this option is often forgotten: it sacrifices offense for a modest defensive gain, and the mechanic adds another die roll to already complex combat.
Possession
The First Edition AD&D books make several references to demons and devils having the ability to possess others. The Players Handbook mentions possession by these creatures,[89] and the Dungeon Masters Guide gives two more explicit examples:
From these references, it is easy to assume that possession is a standard ability of such lower planar beings. Yet the only specific rule text concerns demon lords and princes, who may use their amulets to cast magic jar once per day.[92]
The rules are ultimately inconclusive about whether demons, devils, daemons, and demodands can generally possess mortals. However, since the concept aligns with the folklore these monsters are drawn from, it is reasonable for a DM to allow it in their campaign.
If you do choose to include possession more broadly, it can be modeled as a magic jar spell with added limitations (e.g., usable once per week or month). Its power might scale with the creature’s Hit Dice and Intelligence, with weaker beings exerting less control and offering victims saving throw bonuses.
Monster spell-like abilities require no components and are simply willed into being.
Spell-like Abilities
These powers resemble spells, but without the need for memorization or the process of casting. They include spell-like functions from magical devices, such as wands,[93] and innate spell abilities possessed by monsters, such as demons and devils.[94] They are also referred to as “at will” or “innate” powers. Monster spell-like abilities require no components (i.e., verbal, material, or somatic) and are simply willed into being. Thus, they may be used even while immobilized or in total silence.[95] Each “at will” ability can be used one at a time, once per round. This is spelled out in the Monster Manual: “Only one [spell-like ability] may be used at any given time.” [96] Spell-like abilities require no effort to initiate, having a 1 segment casting time, according to the above-noted Dispel Confusion. However, they still function as a spell, regardless of when they occur during the combat round sequence.[97] They “occur simultaneously with the discharge of missiles, spell casting, and/or turning undead.” [98]
“The Spirit of the Game”
Gary Gygax closed the Dungeon Masters Guide with an afterword reflecting on the philosophy behind AD&D. Read about it in my article, Dungeon & Dragons’ “Spirit of the Game.”
Thief Abilities
Thief skills are often a source of confusion in First Edition AD&D. Deciphering how they operate can be difficult because the rules are scattered across multiple sections of text — not to mention the vague wording that plagues many of the rulebooks. Below are clarifications on some of the more problematic thief abilities:
Back Stab
Thieves must surprise their opponent to gain a back stab attack.[99]
Surprise is achieved by making a successful move silently roll.[100]
Back stabbing does not work if an opponent is aware of the thief’s presence, meaning most thieves only get one chance at it.[101]
Only melee weapons may be used for back stabbing; missile weapons do not qualify.[102] [103]
Finding/Removing Traps
Although the Player’s Handbook states that this skill applies only to “relatively small mechanical devices,” [104] the Dungeon Masters Guide asserts that “small or large” traps can be located and removed.[105]
Magical traps, or those hidden by magical means, cannot be found or removed with this skill.[106]
Hiding in Shadows & Moving Silently:
Undead Abilities
Misunderstandings abound regarding the powers and limitations of undead creatures. I address these issues in detail in a separate article, A Guide to Undead in AD&D.
Concluding Thoughts
First Edition AD&D can be messy, confusing, and contradictory — but that’s part of its magic. Sorting through these rules is less about perfection and more about discovery, debate, and imagination. If this article helps clear a few shadows from the rulebooks, then it’s done its job.
Footnotes
[1] Gary Gygax, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Players Handbook (TSR, 1978), p. 20.
[2] Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Dungeon Masters Screen (TSR, 1979). Released with the Erol Otus cover art, not the revised REF1 from 1985, which omits it.
[3] Gary Gygax & Frank Mentzer, T1-4 Temple of Elemental Evil (TSR, 1985), p. 59.
[4] Gary Gygax, GDQ1-7 Queen of the Spiders (TSR, 1986), p. 14.
[5] Gary Gygax, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Dungeon Masters Guide (TSR, 1979), p. 82.
[6] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 70.
[7] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 81.
[8] Gary Gygax & Dave Arneson; Tom Moldvay (ed.), Dungeons & Dragons Basic Rulebook (TSR, 1981), p. B35.
[9] Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Players Handbook, Revised Second Edition (TSR, 1995), p. 42.
[10] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 21.
[11] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 25.
[12] Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Monster Cards, Set 1 (TSR, 1982).
[13] Gary Gygax & Frank Mentzer, T1-4 Temple of Elemental Evil (TSR, 1985), p. 58.
[14] “Dispel Confusion,” Polyhedron, Issue 2 (Autumn 1981), p. 3.
[15] “New AD&D Aid: Monster Cards,” Dragon, Issue 61 (May 1982).
[16] “Dispel Confusion,” Polyhedron, Issue 32 (1986), p. 29.
[17] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 75 (“phantasmal force” entry).
[18] BATTLESYSTEM Fantasy Combat Supplement (TSR, 1985), p. 26.
[19] Brian Tillotson, “Hold On to Your Illusions!: Keeping Illusions (and Illusionists) in Balance,” Dragon, Issue 130 (Feb. 1988), p. 23.
[20] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 82.
[21] Gary Gygax, WG6 Isle of the Ape (TSR, 1985), p. 3.
[22] Don Turnbull, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Fiend Folio (TSR, 1981), p. 97.
[23] Other demi-human Movement Rates in the Monster Manual: elf = 12”, gnome = 6”, halfling = 9”, human = 12”,
[24] Oddly enough, elves are also listed as wearing chain mail, yet the Monster Manual gives their Movement Rate as 12” rather than the adjusted 9”. This is likely an editorial oversight.
[25] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 27.
[26] “Dispel Confusion,” Polyhedron, Issue 25 (1985), p. 28.
[27] An argument could be made that the subdual example doesn’t count, since the adventurers are trying to capture the dragon rather than kill it. However, Unearthed Arcana (p. 109) makes no mention of subdual reducing the victim’s damage output.
[28] “Dispel Confusion,” Polyhedron, Issue 5 (1982), p. 10.
[29] The First Edition module FRC1 The Ruins of Adventure (p. 5) notes that a bronze dragon’s lightning breath does damage equal to its current hit points — an error. It says nothing about damage from its repulsion breath.
[30] Gary Gygax & Dave Arneson; edited by J. Eric Holmes, Dungeons & Dragons (TSR, 1977), pp. 24–25.
[31] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 9.
[32] Yes, Unearthed Arcana reclassified the paladin as a sub-class of the cavalier, but there’s no need to belabor the point.
[33] “Dispel Confusion,” Polyhedron, Issue 22 (1984), p. 25.
[34] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 12.
[35] Gary Gygax, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Unearthed Arcana (TSR, 1985), p. 8.
[36] Advanced Dungeons & Dragons The Rogues Gallery (TSR, 1980), pp. 23–25.
[37] Frank Mentzer, “Falling Damage,” Dragon, Issue 70 (Feb. 1983), p. 13.
[38] Gary Gygax, “From the Sorcerer’s Scroll,” Dragon, Issue 69 (Jan. 1983), p. 21.
[39] Douglas Niles, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Dungeoneers Survival Guide (TSR, 1986), p. 19.
[40] Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Monster Cards, Set 1 (TSR, 1982).
[41] “New AD&D Aid: Monster Cards,” Dragon, Issue 61 (May 1982).
[42] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 26.
[43] Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Dungeon Masters Adventure Log (TSR, 1980), p. 1.
[44] Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Dungeon Masters Guide, Revised Second Edition (TSR, 1995), p. 58.
[45] The exceptions are the thief class (for dwarves, elves, gnomes, and half-elves) and assassin (for half-orcs). Unearthed Arcana (pp. 8–9) also greatly increased level ceilings for demi-humans based on Prime Requisite scores. A single-classed demi-human has a maximum level limit two levels higher than a multi-classed character (Unearthed Arcana, p. 8).
[46] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 14.
[47] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 6..
[48] Gary Gygax, “Role-Playing: Realism vs. Game Logic; Spell Points, Vanity Press and Rip-offs,” Dragon, Issue 16 (July 1978), p. 16.
[49] “Dispel Confusion,” Polyhedron, Issue 13 (1983), p. 5.
[50] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 21.
[51] Gygax, “Role-Playing: Realism vs. Game Logic; Spell Points, Vanity Press and Rip-offs,” Dragon, Issue 16 (July 1978), p. 16.
[52] Gary Gygax, “Demi-humans Get a Lift,” Dragon, Issue 95 (March 1985), p. 8.
[53] Gary Gygax, “The Half-Ogre, Smiting Him Hip and Thigh,” Dragon, Issue 29 (Sept. 1979), p. 13.
[54] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 168.
[55] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 169.
[56] Dungeons & Dragons Rules Cyclopedia (TSR, 1991), p. 243.
[57] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 12.
[58] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 13.
[59] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 126 (see “potion of longevity” entry).
[60] Gary Gygax, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Monster Manual (TSR, 1977), p. 70.
[61] See Dragon, Issue 43 (Nov. 1980), p. 17; Dragon, Issue 70 (Feb. 1983), p. 63; or Polyhedron, Issue 26 (1986), p. 23.
[62] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 59.
[63] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 102.
[64] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 102.
[65] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 102.
[66] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 61.
[67] Gary Gygax & Dave Arneson; Tom Moldvay (ed.), Dungeons & Dragons Basic Rulebook (TSR, 1981), p. B34.
[68] Polyhedron, Issue 16 (1983), p. 31.
[69] Polyhedron, Issue 18 (1984), p. 29; Dragon, Issue 139 (Nov. 1988), p. 68.
[70] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 19.
[71] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 79.
[72] Gygax, Players Handbook, pp. 15–17
[73] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 32.
[74] A1 Slave Pits of the Undercity (TSR, 1980); C6 The Official RPGA Tournament Handbook (TSR, 1987).
[75] Dragon, Issue 46 (Feb. 1981), p. 56.
[76] Dragon, Issue 103 (Nov. 1985), p. 48.
[77] Gygax, Players Handbook, pp. 32–33.
[78] Examples appear in A1 Slave Pits of the Undercity (1980); C1 The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan (1980); G1-2-3 Against the Giants (1981); I2 Tomb of the Lizard King (1982); S4 The Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth (1982).
[79] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 18.
[80] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 17.
[81] Gygax, Players Handbook, pp. 15–17, 32–33.
[82] G1-2-3 Against the Giants (1981); D2 Vault of the Drow (1978); I11 Needle (1987); A4 In the Dungeons of the Slave Lords (1981); S4 The Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth (1982).
[83] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, pp. 65–66, 75–76.
[84] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 20. The text states “clerics can be of any alignment…save (true) neutral”; only druids could be True Neutral. Unearthed Arcana later lifted this prohibition (p. 7).
[85] “Sage Advice,” Dragon, Issue 136 (Aug. 1988), p. 52.
[86] “Dispel Confusion,” Polyhedron, Issue 9 (1982), p. 9; Issue 17 (1984), p. 32.
[87] Kim Mohan, “Arcana Update, Part 1,” Dragon, Issue 103 (Nov. 1985), p. 16.
[88] Gygax, Players Handbook, pp. 104–105.
[89] Gygax, Players Handbook, pp. 48, 115 (see exorcise spell and mind bar psionic ability).
[90] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 128.
[91] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 137.
[92] Gygax, Monster Manual, p. 16.
[93] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 65.
[94] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 195.
[95] “Dispel Confusion” (Polyhedron, Issue 9, 1982), p. 6.
[96] Gygax, Monster Manual, p. 19.
[97] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 61. See step “4.D”.
[98] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 65.
[99] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 27.
[100] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 28.
[101] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 19.
[102] Players Handbook, p. 27.
[103] Polyhedron, Issue 16 (1983), p. 30.
[104] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 27.
[105] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 19.
[106] Gygax, Dungeon Masters Guide, p. 19.
[107] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 27.
[108] Gygax, Players Handbook, p. 28.
Great job! I especially appreciated the information from Polyhedron, since nobody in my group was an RPGA member, so I never had access to that. Another frequently-confusing area that would be great to cover would be the unarmed combat rules - although I haven't looked through your archives yet, so maybe you've already covered that! You do have an error in #20, though - you say that original D&D used the five alignment system. It used the three alignment lawful-neutral-chaotic system, which B/X and BECMI inherited.