Monday, March 6, 2017

Bismarck Tactical Values

Avalon Hill's Bismarck (1979) has always been one of my favorite games. However, it's a bit long, and my close friends aren't intense wargamers, so it's hard to find fellow players for a game. So recently Isabelle and I started playing some tactical pick-up games -- cut out the whole strategic search aspect, and just run a straight-up firefight on the battleboard. Not how the game was designed, but it's palatable for both of us, and provides a bit of entertainment.

Of course, the problem is that since the game wasn't designed for this, there aren't any guidelines for setting up or balancing such games. We could use the "victory points" for sinking each ship, or some calculation on each ship's statistics, but I found that none of those seemed terribly consistent. You may be able to guess what the solution was: My customary response of simulating a version of the game in code, running it a few tens of million times in a Monte Carlo simulation, and seeing what balance of objects give a 50% chance of winning against each other. (Prior examples of this were done for: D&D Arena, Monster Metrics, Book of War, Star Frontiers.) Results in this case are shown in the table below (plus PDF, ODS versions):

Points-balanced by Monte Carlo simulation


Methods

  • We used the Bismarck itself as the "basis" ship worth 30 points (the same as its victory point value in the game as written). Every other ship in the game was run through a loop of creating N = 1, 2, 3... sister clones and battling each group in 10,000 repeated firefights against the Bismarck. Once we found a number N that beat the Bismarck over 50% of the time, we did a linear interpolation for that type of ship's real value (shown under "Points" above).
  • For simplicity, the simplified simulation was always run assuming: Basic combat rules only, a fight at long range, firing at broadsides, with no movement, and port sides facing. The fact that it was at long "B" range implied that only main guns could fire, at half salvoes; and also no torpedoes could be used (which are not in use for Basic game combat anyway).
  • Aircraft carriers (CV's) were skipped -- Their power is not in ship-to-ship combat; they are usually allowed to avoid such combat; and they have no main guns usable at long range, so their effectiveness here would be automatically zero. 
  • I batched up ships into real-world classes to make the table a bit shorter. "Game #" shows the number of ships of that class included in the game; "Real #" shows the number of real-world ships so constructed. Bismarck and Tirpitz (really sister ships) are separated because the game gives the Tirpitz reduced-fire penalties for not finishing sea trials in its alternative scenario.
  • The AI of either side is set to shoot all its guns at the one target on the other side with the biggest guns. When that target is sunk or degraded to zero firepower, the AI switches to the next highest-gunned target, and so forth. This was my attempt to split the difference between real-world action and optimal in-game tactics.
  • Code & data archive is made available, as usual (Java ZIP).


Observations

  • Compared to the table above, the official game victory points seem to greatly undervalue British battleships (BB, BC). The rules-as-written only award 12, 14, or 16 points for those types (versus 20 or 21 points above).
  • Likewise, cruisers of all types seem undervalued in the game. The official rules assign only 6 points for any heavy cruiser (CA; usually 8 points above), and 4 points for any light cruiser (CL; again usually 7 or 8 points above with some exceptions). In particular, the game assigns almost indistinguishable stats for most CA's and CL's, so the difference in victory points is rather hard to justify. The assessed valued of most CL's is exactly double that given for them in the game.
  • The French battlecruisers (BC) seem probably the most undervalued. The game only gives them 8 victory points value (assessed above at 19 points; note that victory points as shown assume British control, i.e., the special rule for possible surrender is not in effect).
  • The US BB North Carolina is also undervalued at 20 points in the rules (versus 29 above). Note that the rules don't give it special combat advantages like resistance to special damage, reduced evasion damage, etc., that the Bismarck does, so at least a 1-point disadvantage seems reasonable. 
  • Ships suffering from the "reduced fire" rule (new ships with a history of gunnery problems, 50% to reduce bow or stern main guns by half in any turn; i.e., King George V, Prince of Wales, Tirpitz) really take a big hit in their value in the simulator. Prime example: The Bismarck is identical to the Tirpitz except for reduced-fire, and the assessed point values come out to 30 versus 24 (i.e., a 6-point difference just for the reduced fire effect). The Intermediate game rules assign 28 victory points to the Tirpitz, which probably should have been lower.
  • The Prinz Eugen and her sister ships are best assessed here at 9 points. Note that the game rules vacillate on this datum -- she is assigned 10 victory points in the Basic game, and 8 points in the Intermediate game. The best value is apparently the midpoint of those numbers. 
  • We might interpret the fact that all non-German ships are apparently undervalued in terms of game victory points as this: The German player is very much incited to avoid ship-to-ship combat, and truly must focus (as was the goal of the real operation) on evading British combat ships and catching convoys instead. Even if the German player were to exchange exact-same-stats warship for warship, they would then lose on victory points.
  • The point-values in the table above can be used to set up reasonably-balanced firefights. For example, a 40-point game would simulate the classic Bismarck & Prinz Eugen vs. Hood & Prince of Wales face-off. A 100-point game would make for an epic fleet battle.


Open Questions

  • Considering the critique of undervalued game victory point values above, a number of factors not simulated in the program might conceivably make a difference, such as -- Speed, search values, fuel consumption, torpedoes, overall prestige, etc. While I think that most of these would be fairly minimal (depending on ruleset in use), note that most of these factors would if anything further advantage the cruisers -- which are already seen as worthy of improved point valuations above (i.e., if anything, perhaps they should be even higher).
  • The battleship-vs-battleship valuations should be the most dependable; they generally have similar values for any factors not handled in the simulation. Speed (evasion) is usually in the range of 28-32 knots, effectively equal for game purposes. A notable exception would be for the older, slow British battleships -- the Revenge & Nelson classes at only 20 and 21 knots. Possibly the high valuations for those classes above should be adjusted downward because of speed.
  • I didn't code special handling for the ships with all-front main guns (Nelson, Dunkerque classes). It wouldn't make any effective difference in this all-broadsides scenario, anyway. 
  • Point of rules debate: The game Hit Record Pad gives all cruisers a 0-point box for secondary guns on each side. Obviously that provides no fire value (no secondaries are usable at "B" range here anyway). But there is a bit of a dilemma on whether that box should be crossed out for damage purposes or not. If so, it would provide an additional 1-point defensive buffer before cruisers start taking midships damage (which ultimately culminates in sinking). The simulator here assumes we do not spend a damage point marking those zero-boxes. If we adjudicated that the other way, then that would increase the assessed value of cruisers even more.
  • The game rules officially allow ships to split their salvoes among multiple targets (whereas my simulator directs all fire from a task force at one target). Perhaps if we had a more sophisticated AI that could split up targets, the big ships with many gains would claw back some advantage when fighting many smaller ships (i.e., lowering the value of cruisers down a bit). One could debate philosophy of whether we should pursue pure in-game advantage, or instead try to simulate real-world fire control tactics of the WWII era.
  • In the table above, the "Real #" column is intended if anyone wants to expand the ships in use beyond those included in the boxed game. In addition, many of these classes had even more such ships planned for construction, many of which were scrapped at the outbreak of WWII; players should of course feel free to further expand the fleets in any "What If?" scenarios. Wikipedia is has very well-organized overviews of each class of ships referenced above.

 Thoughts? Anyone still play tabletop Bismarck?


Monday, February 27, 2017

Spells Through The Ages – Protection from Evil

Man in suit holding cross
What can you do when evil stalks the land, threatening both the common man and heroes alike with doom and destruction? Consider casting protection from evil, a surprisingly potent 1st-level spell for both wizards and clerics.

D&D spells with "evil" in the title have a contentious existence; there is ongoing debate about whether it's appropriate for them to work against anyone with an evil alignment factor, or if they should only work against foes immediately intent on doing one harm. It seems like the rules as written ping-pong back and forth a bit between different editions (and is complicated by the fact that the very earliest version of D&D didn't even have any "evil" alignments as such). My friend Paul wrote about that earlier in the context of the detect evil spell from the clerical perspective. As we investigate this case, we will also consider the higher-level, area-effect versions of protection from evil.


Chainmail Fantasy

Protection from Evil: A 12" diameter circle which will keep out all evil fantastic creatures/men.

This spell did not exist in the 1st edition of Chainmail, but was added in 2nd edition Chainmail (1972; pre-OD&D) as the 8th in its list of 8 spells. It seems pretty potent -- irremediably warding off all "evil" beings in a 12" radius, which would be a big chunk of one's playing table (to be downgraded later). But elsewhere it is written: "It  is impossible to draw a distinct line between 'good' and 'evil' fantastic figures" (2E, p. 35); and of course the only alignments given are Law-Neutral-Chaos. So as usual, players or a referee must make some kind of adjudications on the issue (except for Dragons which are explicitly noted as being "extremely evil and egotistical beasts..."). We could consider treating all creatures of Chaos as evil, but then that creates an asymmetry in the spell for Chaotic parties, at which time we might consider making it effect any of one's enemies... well, there's the whole Pandora's Box of D&D "evil" right there, from just this one single sentence description for the spell.

In the 2nd Edition Chainmail quoted above, "complexity" (levels) for spells was not yet given; but by the 3rd Edition this spell was set at "Complexity 3".


Original D&D

Protection from Evil: This spell hedges the conjurer round with a magic circle to keep out attacks from enchanted monsters. It also serves as an "armor" from various evil attacks, adding a +1 to all saving throws and taking a — 1 from hit dice of evil opponents. (Note that this spell is not cumulative in effect with magic armor and rings, although it will continue to keep out enchanted monsters.) Duration: 6 turns.

This is a 1st-level spell for any spellcaster (magic-user or cleric). It's slightly unclear about whether there's one effect here or two (is the first sentence just flavor text, and are "enchanted monsters" the same or distinct from "evil opponents"?). At the 3rd level, better matching the spell from Chainmail, we also have:
Protection from Evil, 10' Radius: A Protection from Evil spell which extends to include a circle around the Magic-User and also lasts for 12 rather than 6 turns.

The range is, of course, much reduced from that seen in Chainmail (but see below). I think that when I first played D&D (via Holmes, basically the same) I interpreted the effect here in a very restrictive manner; the protected got a ±1 bonus, no more, and the spell seemed very weak. Like many things in the evolution of D&D, if we see this as a continuous work presuming awareness of Chainmail, then the idea that "enchanted monsters" are entirely warded beyond reach is easier to pick up on, and makes the spell seem much more useful. In fact, the inclusion of the added/separate ±1 bonus effect really seems to mostly confuse the issue.

In the Swords & Spells spell chart, protection from evil, 10' radius is given an area effect of 2" diameter, which is a little wonky because 1" is 10 scale yards, so the radius is effectively 30 feet. That's consistent with the rest of the system keeping tabletop inches constant at an outdoor scale, but it seems extra-weird when the "10'" is explicitly in the name of the spell. (Gygax later apologized for that issue and tried to adjust it, with mixed results.)


D&D Basic/Expert Rules

Protection from Evil 
Range: 0 (caster only)
Duration: 6 turns

This spell circles the magic-user or elf with a magic barrier. This barrier will move with the caster. The spell serves as some protection from "evil" attacks (attacks by monsters of some alignment other than the caster's alignment) by adding 1 to the spell caster's saving throws, and subtracting 1 from the "to hit" die roll of evil opponents. The spell will also keep out attacks from enchanted (summoned or created) monsters (such as living statues), but not missile fire attacks from these creatures. The spell caster may break this protection by attacking the monster in hand-to-hand combat.

Moldvay provides needed clarification to the spell here in Basic D&D. There are clearly two separate effects. "Evil" here counts as any alignment other than the caster's (which is not, I think, a ruling used in other editions). "Enchanted" monsters are identified as those summoned or created. There's several points for clarity in the B/X version. The area-effect version appears in Cook's Expert rules as:

Protection from Evil 10' 
Radius Range: 0'
Duration: 12 turns
 

This spell circles the caster with a magical barrier that will protect all friendly creatures within 10' of the magic-user or elf. This barrier will move with the caster, and acts exactly as a protection from evil spell (see page X13).

The reference to page X13 directs one the clerical version of the spell (at 4th level, instead of 3rd):

Protection from Evil 10' 
Radius Range: 0'
Duration: 12 turns
 

This spell circles the caster with a magical barrier that will protect all friendly creatures within 10' of the cleric. This barrier will move with the cleric. The spell serves as some protection from "evil" attacks (attacks by monsters of an alignment other than the caster's) by adding 1 to the caster's saving throw and subtracting 1 from evil opponents' "to hit" roll. This spell will also keep out melee attacks from enchanted monsters (such as elementals) but not missile or magical attacks from these creatures. Enchanted monsters can melee if any of the protected creatures attempt to attack them with hand-to-hand combat.

I feel like one of the most important uses of protection from evil (at any level) is explicated above: it entirely wards out elementals. That's particularly important given that if concentration breaks after conjuring an elemental, it irrecoverably turns to attack the caster. Well: with protection from evil, that becomes a non-issue (at least for the caster directly). If I were conjuring an elemental, I'd never, ever do it without first treating myself with protection from evil first.

Note also the fact that the protection moves with the caster is explicated for the first time. Also: Thus far, the spell can only be cast on the caster him- or herself.


AD&D 1st Edition

Protection From Evil (Abjuration) Reversible

Level: 1
Range: Touch
Duration: 2 rounds/level
Area of Effect: Creature touched
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 segment
Saving Throw: None

Explanation/Description: With the differences shown above, and the requirement of powdered iron and silver as the material components for tracing the magic circle for protection from evil, the spell is the same as the first level cleric protection from evil spell (q.v.).

The clerical reference says this:

Protection From Evil (Abiuration) Reversible

Level: 1
Range: Touch
Duration: 3 rounds/level
Area of Effect: Creature touched
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 4 segments
Saving Throw: None

Explanation/Description: When this spell is cast, it acts as if it were a magical armor upon the recipient. The protection encircles the recipient at a one foot distance, thus preventing bodily contact by creatures of an enchanted or conjured nature such as aerial servants, demons, devils, djinn efreet, elementals, imps, invisible stalkers, night hags, quasits, salamanders, water weirds, wind walkers, and xorn. Summoned animals or monsters are similarly hedged from the protected creature. Furthermore, any and all attacks launched by evil creatures incur a penalty of -2 from dice rolls ”to hit” the protected creature, and any saving throws caused by such attacks are made at +2 on the protected creature‘s dice. This spell can be reversed to become protection from good, although it still keeps out enchanted evil creatures as well. To complete this spell, the cleric must trace a 3’ diameter circle upon the floor (or ground) with holy water for protection from evil, with blood for protection from good - or in the air using burning incense or smoldering dung with respect to evil/good.


Like many spells in AD&D, Gygax has downgraded the duration from turns to rounds (arguably, "turns" in OD&D Vol-1 were intended as in Chainmail, i.e., the 1-minute span that AD&D calls rounds). For the first time, the spell can be cast on any creature, not just the caster, opening up its use greatly. The protection is bumped up to ±2, which I like (somewhere I've got a personal to rule to ignore any situational modifiers that only make a 1-pip difference out of 20). That bonus is against "evil creatures" which in these rules we must assume is actual, evil-in-the-alignment status.

The prevent-contact effect works against enchanted, conjured, and summoned creatures, and Gygax has more-or-less tried to give a complete list of what counts as "enchanted" (a common move in the AD&D PHB). I think the complete-hedging here is still  bit unclear as a separate effect; in fact, Gygax is compelled to add yet more clarification errata in the later AD&D DMG: "Protection From Evil: Note that this excludes (keeps out) monsters using natural (body) weapon attacks which require touching the protected character" (p. 41 and 45).

The components provide a nice thematic piece of of flavor; tracing a circle on the floor (with holy water, blood, dung, or powdered silver/iron, depending on the caster). But that's somewhat hard to rationalize with the 4 segment (officially, 24-second) casting time; and it may confuse the issue of whether the protection moves with the recipient (i.e., when they step out of the drawn circle). For magic-users, the area effect follows:

Protection From Evil, 10’ Radius (Abjuration) Reversible

Level: 3
Range: Touch
Duration: 2 rounds/level
Area of Effect: 10’ radius sphere around creature touched
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 3 segments
Saving Throw: None

Explanation/Description: This spell is the same as the first level protection from evil spell except with respect to its area of effect. See also the first level cleric protection from evil spell for general information.

The clerical version gets more detail (esp., concerning components):

Protection From Evil, 10' Radius (Abjuration) Reversible

Level: 4
Range: Touch
Duration: 1 turn/level
Area of Effect: 20' diameter sphere
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 7 segments
Saving Throw: None

Explanation/Description: The globe of protection of this spell is identical in all respects to a protection from evil (q.v.) spell, except that it encompasses a much larger area and the duration of the protection from evil, 10'radius spell is greater. To complete this spell, the cleric must trace a circle 20' in diameter using holy water or blood, incense or smouldering dung as according to the protection from evil spell.
This latter version, I think, would be very easy to mistake as a non-mobile effect (see the area of effect; no "creature touched" is listed).

For the 5th-level conjure elemental spell (and the similar 6th-level clerical aerial servant spell), a postscript note at the end says this (p. 79):

N.B. Special protection from uncontrolled elementals is available by means of a pentacle, pentagram, thaumaturgic triangle, magic circle, or protection from evil spell.

That's possibly a little confusing, because the first four items in the list are not spells of any sort; only protection from evil is. The DMG has a bit more detail on that under the clerical spell:

Aerial Servant: The spell caster should be required to show you what form of protective inscription he or she has used when the spell is cost. The three forms mentioned are:
Magic circle, pentagram, thaumaturgic circle

The way that I got confused by that was: I thought those were the diagrams you had to draw with the components of your protection from evil (or 10' radius) spell. (Link: The remarkable danger of pictures in conflict with words.) The intent was clarified a bit more in Gygax's later Dungeon Module S4: The Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth, which included a separate 32-page book of new monsters and magic items, most of which were not used in the S4 adventure (rather, it served as something of a prototype for the Monster Manual II and sections of Unearthed Arcana). Among the additions was a 3-page section expanding on Magical Diagrams (including 6 types with varying effects, each with a large quarter-page illustration). No spells were required for construction of these protections, only time and money (starting at 1,000 gp for a temporary work or 10,000 gp for a permanent inlaid one). Unlike the rest of the work, this information was not included in any later rulebook, to my knowledge.


AD&D 2nd Edition

Protection From Evil
(Abjuration)
Reversible

Range: Touch
Duration: 2 rds./level
Area of Effect: Creature touched
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1
Saving Throw: None

When this spell is cast, it creates a magical barrier around the recipient at a distance of 1 foot. The barrier moves with the recipient and has three major effects: First, all attacks made by evil (or evilly enchanted) creatures against the protected creature suffer -2 penalties to attack rolls; any saving throws caused by such attacks are made with +2 bonuses.

Second, any attempt to possess (as by a magic jar attack) or to exercise mental control over (as by a vampire's charm ability) the protected creature is blocked by this spell. Note that the protection does not prevent a vampire's charm itself, but it does prevent the exercise of mental control through the barrier. Likewise, a possessing life force is merely kept out. It would not be expelled if in place before the protection is cast.

Third, the spell prevents bodily contact by creatures of an extraplanar or conjured nature (such as aerial servants, elementals, imps, invisible stalkers, salamanders, water weirds, xorn, and others). This causes the natural (body) weapon attacks of such creatures to fail and the creatures to recoil, if such attacks require touching the protected being. Animals or monsters summoned or conjured by spells or similar magic are likewise hedged from the character.

This protection ends if the protected character makes a melee attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature.

To complete this spell, the wizard must trace a 3-foot-diameter circle on the floor (or ground) with powdered silver.

This spell can be reversed to become protection from good; the second and third benefits remain unchanged. The material component for the reverse is a circle of powdered iron.

You'll notice that this spell is getting pretty long at this point with all the cases and side-cases. I think the modifier effect is still against real-evil-in-the-alignment foes. Cook has added another power to the spell here (identified as the "Second"); preventing mental control by charm, magic jar, etc. I guess he thought such a defense was needed somewhere, but wasn't worth a whole new spell for it. Cook is again the one to explicate (as in B/X) that the effect moves with the recipient. Consider also:

Protection From Evil, 10' Radius
(Abjuration)
Reversible

Range: Touch
Duration: 2 rds./level
Area of Effect: 10-ft. radius around creature touched
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 3
Saving Throw: None

The globe of protection of this spell is identical in all respects to a protection from evil spell, except that it encompasses a much larger area and its duration is greater. The effect is centered on and moves with the creature touched. Any protected creature within the circle can break the warding against enchanted or summoned monsters by meleeing them. If a creature too large to fit into the area of effect is the recipient of the spell, the spell acts as a normal protection from evil spell for that creature only.

To complete this spell, the caster must trace a circle 20 feet in diameter using powdered silver. The material component for the reverse is powdered iron.

The last line of conjure elemental in these rules reads: "Special protection from uncontrolled elementals is available by means of a protection from evil spell." The special magic diagrams of Gygax in 1E are gone.


D&D 3rd Edition

Protection from Evil

Abjuration [Good]
Level: Brd 1, Clr 1, Good 1, Pal 1, Sor/Wiz 1
Components: V, S, M/DF
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Touch
Target: Creature touched
Duration: 1 minute/level (D)
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance: No (see text)

This spell wards a creature from attacks by evil creatures, from mental control, and from summoned or conjured creatures. It creates a magical barrier around the subject at a distance of 1 foot. The barrier moves with the subject and has three major effects:

First, the subject gets a +2 deflection bonus to AC and a +2 resistance bonus on saves. Both these bonuses apply against attacks made by evil creatures.

Second, the barrier blocks any attempt to possess the warded creature (as by a magic jar attack) or to exercise mental control over the creature (as by a vampire’s supernatural domination ability, which works similar to dominate person). The protection does not prevent a vampire’s domination itself, but it prevents the vampire from mentally commanding the protected creature. If the protection from evil effect ends before the domination effect does, the vampire would then be able to mentally command the controlled creature. Likewise, the barrier keeps out a possessing life force but does not expel one if it is in place before the spell is cast. This second effect works regardless of alignment.

Third, the spell prevents bodily contact by summoned or conjured creatures. This causes the natural weapon attacks of such creatures to fail and the creatures to recoil if such attacks require touching the warded creature. Good elementals and outsiders are immune to this effect. The protection against contact by summoned or conjured creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature. Spell resistance can allow a creature to overcome this protection and touch the warded creature.

In many ways, this is the same as the 2E spell with its three distinct effects (which I find a bit hard to remember). Again the function is against alignment-evil, so that's pretty much uniform across all editions (and different from its cousin detect evil). The big list of individual enchanted creatures is out; so is the detail of the drawing a circle with the material component. The area-effect version, post-Chainmail, has always been a bit awkwardly named with the "10' radius" bit in the title; here it is renamed as follows:

Magic Circle against Evil

Abjuration [Good]
Level: Brd 3, Clr 3, Good 3, Pal 3, Sor/Wiz 3
Components: V, S, M/DF
Casting Time: 1 action
Area: Emanates 10 ft. from touched creature
Duration: 10 minutes/level
Spell Resistance: No (see text)

This spell wards all creatures in the area from attacks by evil creatures, from mental control, and from summoned or conjured creatures.

The subjects get a +2 deflection bonus to AC and a +2 resistance bonus on saves. Both these bonuses apply against attacks made by evil creatures.

The barrier blocks any attempt to possess the warded creature or to exercise mental control over the creature. The protection does not prevent a spell or effect that grants mental commands to be cast on the creature, but it prevents the caster of such a spell from mentally commanding the protected creature. If warding effect ends before the mental control effect does, the caster would then be able to mentally command the controlled creature. Likewise, the barrier keeps out a possessing life force but does not expel one if it is in place before the spell is cast. This effect works regardless of alignment.

The spell prevents bodily contact by summoned or conjured creatures. This causes the natural weapon attacks of such creatures to fail and the creatures to recoil if such attacks require touching the warded creature. Good elementals and outsiders are immune to this effect. The protection against contact by summoned or conjured creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature. Spell resistance can allow a creature to overcome this protection and touch the warded creature.

This spell has a special function that the character may choose when casting the spell. A magic circle can be focused inward rather than outward. In this case, it serves as an immobile, temporary magical prison for a summoned creature. The creature cannot cross the circle’s boundaries.

The character must beat a creature’s SR in order to keep it at bay, but the deflection and resistance bonuses and the protection from mental control apply regardless of enemies’ SR.

If a creature too large to fit into the spell’s area is the subject of the spell, the spell acts as normal for that creature only.

This spell is not cumulative with protection from evil and vice versa.

Yet another, fourth, feature has now been added to the spell; the ability to make a "prison" for a summoned creature. Note that this replaces one of the functions of Gygax's non-spell, magic diagrams back in 1E (maybe this is part of why I get confused by that?). The duration is much increased from the 1E/2E versions.

I kind of like the instinct to get the "10' radius" out of the title, but: I can't get over the fact that the effect isn't really a "circle" when you look at it in 3 dimensions. Even back in 1E Gygax indicated the area of effect as a "sphere". Plus there's no signal in the name that it's an iteration of protection from evil (moreover: this was the original back in Chainmail). In my Book of Spells rules, I renamed this again to protective sphere. Not completely perfect, but I'm happier with that name than some other options.

Note that conjure elemental doesn't even exist anymore as a distinct spell in 3E, so any special shout-out for this spell there is likewise gone.


Conclusions

Protection from evil is one of those spells that grew exponentially in rules-size over time. Originally it was just one sentence with 12 words in Chainmail; by 3E the analogous area-effect version is almost 400 words long. What has a really bad design smell to me is the number of distinct effects given to it -- Chainmail had 1, OD&D either 1 or 2 (a bit murky), 1E clearly 2, 2E had 3, 3E had 4. That is: basically every edition added another brand-new disjointed effect to the list, contributing to ongoing bloat (and difficulty in parsing this 1st-level spell for old and new players alike). Did 4E have 5, and 5E have 6 separate effects? I don't know.

What level of the complexity scale do you like your protection from evil? And did you ever use Gygax's side-system for magic diagrams of protection?


Monday, February 20, 2017

Spells Through The Ages – Magic Mouth

Dwarves on hobbit on stairwell react to mouth on pillar
An entity which is nothing but a BIG MOUTH. Is it only hot air? Or can it still pose a distinct danger by virtue of being "Wicked, tricksy, false!"; and if so, then what should we immediately do about it?

Denis McCarthy reminds us that a version of a magic mouth appears in Jack Vance's Dying Earth, appearing on an innkeeper's forehead.The spell wasn't in Original D&D (1974); it first showed up with the frequently wonky new spells in OD&D Supplement I, Greyhawk, in 1976. In some sense, it's part of a Gygaxian gesture to expand the game world to cover more than just combat encounters (see also: unseen servant and cantrips, last week). If nothing else, it must have served as inspiration for Dave Trampier's jaw-dropping piece of artwork near the end of the AD&D Player's Handbook, seen at the top here. The spell scores major points for that alone.


OD&D Supplement-I

Magic Mouth: A spell which resembles ventriliquism in that the sound issues from a chosen object, hut there are differences. A mouth appears, or the mouth of the object moves in accordance with what is being said. The Magic Mouth can he ordered to speak upon certain conditions, i.e. if anyone comes within 10' of it, if a neutral person comes within 10', if Flubbit the Wizard comes within 10', and so on. The spell lasts until the message is given. The message cannot exceed twenty-five words.
This is a 2nd-level spell. Given that it has no effect other than uttering 25 words, one might think it a total waste of a spell. However, it is intriguing in a few ways; one, that it has apparently permanent duration until it speaks; and two, that it apparently has remarkable abilities of detection, available to few other spells in the system (detect alignment, class, identity of individuals, etc.)

Elsewhere, the charm plants spell notes, "For example, combined with several Magic Mouth spells, the plants could act as a warning system". Of the cursed crystal hypnosis ball, it is said: "It will hypnotise its user and leave him in such a state from 3-24 turns, unless there is also a Magic Mouth spell placed upon the item. In the latter case the user of the item will carry out the instructions given by the Magic Mouth immediately, conforming to the limits given for a Suggestion spell."


Holmes D&D Basic

Magic Mouth -- Level 2; Range: 0 feet; Duration: infinite

Resembles the ventriloquism spell in that sound issues from a chosen object, but there are differences. A mouth appears, or the mouth of the object moves in accordance with what is said. The magic mouth can be ordered to speak under certain conditions, such as when anyone comes within 10 feet, or when a specific person comes within 10 feet, etc. The spell lasts until the message is given. Message can not exceed 25 words.
I don't usually include the Holmes rules here, but this bears a listen. It is almost exactly the same, except for one notable edit: the example of detecting someone's alignment has been struck out. Zenopus Archives informs us that the alignment example was gone as of Holmes' original manuscript; note that this will fortuitously synch up with Gygax's changes in the AD&D PHB in the next year. (Less critically, we note that Flubbit the Wizard is no longer named; but Zenopus Archives also informs us that Flubbit appeared in a few other examples in Holmes' manuscript -- starting gold, starting spells -- before being turned into Malchor by the Gygaxian editorial pass)

Interestingly, although magic mouth was included by Holmes, it was not included in the Basic/Expert D&D rules by Moldvay and Cook (perhaps as part of their wrangling the magic-user spell lists to exactly 12 entries at each level, suitable for d12 random selection).


AD&D 1st Edition

Magic Mouth (Alteration)

Level: 2
Range: Special
Duration: Special
Area of Effect: One object
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 2 segments
Saving Throw: None

Explanation/Description: When this spell is cast, the magic-user empowers the chosen object with an enchanted mouth which suddenly appears and speaks the message which the spell caster imparted upon the occurrence of a specified event. The magic mouth can speak any message of 25 words or less in a language known by the spell caster, over a 1 turn period from start to finish. It cannot speak magic spells. The mouth moves to the words articulated, so if it is placed upon a statue, for example, the mouth of the statue would actually move and appear to speak. Of course, the magic mouth can be placed upon a tree, rock, door or any other object excluding intelligent members of the animal or vegetable kingdoms. The spell will function upon specific occurrence according to the command of the spell caster, i.e. speak to the first creature that touches you - or to the first creature that passes within 30'. Command can be as general or specific and detailed as desired, such as the following: "Speak only when an octogenerian female human carrying a sack of groat clusters sits cross-legged within 1'." Command range is ½" per level of the magic-user, so a 6th level magic-user can command the magic mouth to speak at a maximum encounter range of 3", i.e. "Speak when a winged creature comes within 3'." Until the speak command can be fulfilled, the magic mouth will remain in effect, thus spell duration is variable. A magic mouth cannot distinguish invisible creatures, alignments, level or hit dice, nor class, except by external garb. The material component of this spell is a small bit of honeycomb.
A bit more detail is given to the spell here, possibly after Gygax confronted some player abuse on the issue. It cannot speak spells. It cannot appear on an intelligent creature. It cannot detect anything about a triggering creature other than what would be known from plain sight -- now, no detection of alignment, level, class, invisibility, etc. Clearly, at some point Gygax must have decided his early example gave away too much. As noted above, that matches the Holmes manuscript (was that just a lucky coincidence, or was there some other communication on the issue?).

Magic mouth is also noted as an "object" spell subject to the effect permanency at the 8th-level (p. 91); this can only mean that the message is deliverable on repeated occasions, because there is already no duration limit to the spell. In these rules, the spell is not referenced in either charm plants or the crystal hypnosis ball (the effect is more directly given as a telepathic suggestion).

In addition to the iconic Trampier artwork, magic mouth was to memorable effect in a few adventure modules of the period. In Gygax's AD&D module G1, Steading of the Hill Giant Chief (1978), it is used as a ruse on a war hammer: "This weapon has a magic mouth spell placed on it to speak to a dwarf: 'Here's a kiss for you, runt!' so until it has spoken it will radiate magic very strongly." In his follow-up D1, Descent Into the Depths of the Earth (1978), "The lich, Asberdies, has cast 600 magic mouth spells in various portions of his lair — walls, floor, ceiling, and on stalactites and stalagmites too. Therefore, magic detection will show virtually everyplace in the cave as radiating magic...".

In Mike Carr's Basic D&D module B1 (1979), In Search of the Unknown, a pair are in area I (one), so this was likely many players' first-ever encounter in the game of D&D: "The east mouth speaks first, in a booming voice: 'WHO DARES ENTER THIS PLACE AND INTRUDE UPON THE SANCTUARY OF ITS INHABITANTS?' After but a moment, and drowning out any attempted reply by the party, comes the reply from the west mouth: "ONLY A GROUP OF FOOLHARDY EXPLORERS DOOMED TO CERTAIN DEATH!'", followed by prolonged maniacal laughter. (Raise your hand if you ever practiced delivering this all-caps dialogue with appropriate gusto. No? Just me?). Gygax again references the spell in module B2 (1980), Keep on the Borderlands: "You can have magic mouth spells placed in key areas to shout 'ALARM' whenever an invisible creature passes within 10' or so!" (Note that in the 1981 revision of the module, the phrase "magic mouth spells" was replaced by a more generic "magical traps"; which nonetheless provides another piece of evidence that B2 was originally written for OD&D rules. Thanks to Zenopus Archives in the comments for reminding me of this reference.)


AD&D 2nd Edition

Magic Mouth
(Alteration)


Range: 10 yds.
Duration: Special
Area of Effect: 1 object 

Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 2
Saving Throw: None

When this spell is cast, the wizard imbues the chosen object with an enchanted mouth that suddenly appears and speaks its message when a specified event occurs. The message, which must be of 25 words or less, can be in any language known by the spellcaster, and can be delivered over a period of one turn. The mouth cannot speak magical spells or use command words. It does, however, move to the words articulated -- if it is placed upon a statue, the mouth of the statue would actually move and appear to speak. Of course, the magic mouth can be placed upon a tree, rock, door, or any other object, excluding intelligent members of the animal or vegetable kingdoms.
 

The spell functions when specific conditions are fulfilled, according to the command of the spellcaster. Some examples are to speak "to the first creature that touches you," or "to the first creature that passes within 30 feet." Commands can be as general or as detailed as desired, although only visual and audible triggers can be used, such as the following: "Speak only when a venerable female human carrying a sack of groat clusters sits crosslegged within 1 foot." Such visual triggers can react to a character using the disguise ability. Command range is 5 yards per level of the wizard, so a 6th-level wizard can command the magic mouth to speak at a maximum encounter range of 30 yards ("Speak when a winged creature comes within 30 yards."). The spell lasts until the speak command can be fulfilled; thus, the spell duration is variable. A magic mouth cannot distinguish invisible creatures, alignments, level, Hit Dice, or class, except by external garb. If desired, the effect can be keyed to a specific noise or spoken word.
 

The material component of this spell is a small bit of honeycomb.
I'm pretty sure that's all functionally identical to 1E. It's still listed as an allowed target for the permanency spell. The DMG notes, in the section on hiring assassins, that "Wizards make use of magic mouth, alarm, explosive runes, and other trap spells."


D&D 3rd Edition

Magic Mouth

Illusion (Glamer)
Level: Brd 2, Sor/Wiz 2
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target: One creature or object
Duration: Permanent until discharged
Saving Throw: Will negates (object)
Spell Resistance: Yes (object)

This spell imbues the chosen object or creature with an enchanted mouth that suddenly appears and speaks its message the next time a specified event occurs. The message, which must be twenty-five or fewer words long, can be in any language known by the character and can be delivered over a period of 10 minutes. The mouth cannot speak verbal components, use command words, or activate magical effects. It does, however, move according to the words articulated.

The spell functions when specific conditions are fulfilled according to the character's command as set in the spell. Commands can be as general or as detailed as desired, although only visual and audible triggers can be used. Triggers react to what appears to be the case. Disguises and illusions can fool them. Normal darkness does not defeat a visual trigger, but magical darkness or invisibility does. Silent movement or magical silence defeats audible triggers. Audible triggers can be keyed to general types of noises or to a specific noise or spoken word. Note that actions can serve as triggers if they are visible or audible. A magic mouth cannot distinguish invisible creatures, alignments, level, HD, or class except by external garb.

The range limit of a trigger is 15 feet per caster level. Regardless of range, the mouth can respond only to visible or audible triggers and actions in line of sight or within hearing distance.

Material Component: Worth 10 gp.
That's mostly the same, with some extra detail on exactly what kinds of subterfuge can get around the triggering of the magic mouth. Apparently the spell has the equivalent of infravision (sees through normal darkness, but not magical darkness). Again, it's listed under permanency. Deceptively important change: the material component switches from unpriced "small bit of honeycomb" to unidentified thing "Worth 10 gp" (see discussion below).


Conclusions

Magic mouth is subtle, and it embarrasses me, in that I've always had a hard time developing intuition for its uses. Among its best uses is as an overnight alarm for a party's campsite. Or an alarm system on any wizard's tower, book, treasure chest, front door, etc. Or any town or castle with a wizard in residence. Or on the robe of a wizard to alert him or her to pick-pockets. This list goes on; but none of those uses were ever explicated in the spell descriptions themselves, so I have a bit of a blind spot for them; only the examples in the adventure modules of the time clue me into its best uses.

And the fact that it is only 2nd-level (castable by a 3rd-level magic-user), permanent until triggered, and free to cast (before 3E), gives it possibly campaign-altering potential. A wizard would be well within his rights to spend his down time casting magic mouth alarms on every single one of his positions before adventuring outside. Taking the example of the lich Asberdies, crafty wizards of this or earlier ages could go around alarming every castle wall, door -- maybe every tree, bush, rock -- with a magic mouth, either as defense or just for the lolz. Maybe the whole world comes to radiate magic from mouths cast with long-forgotten triggers.

That may possibly get out of hand in that way. 3E made the move to add an unnamed 10 gp material component, such that unending magic mouths become less reasonable.  In my own Book of Spells, I developed a rule in which no spell below 5th was allowed to be permanent (for reasons such as these); magic mouth there lasts one week maximum (the upper limit in my system for 2nd level spells). On a related note, given that magic mouth overlaps with ventriloquism so much (it is directly referenced in OD&D and Holmes), I made the editorial decision to simply snip that latter 1st-level spell from my list.

Any intelligent thoughts? Speak up!

Monday, February 13, 2017

Spells Through The Ages – Unseen Servant and Cantrips

Broom sweeping by itself
Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, "The noblest service comes from nameless hands; and the best servant does his work unseen." But is that true? Perhaps the best servant lives large and in charge, and is more of an in-your-face kind of entity. Or perhaps we should not qualify such a being as any kind of true servant at all.

Now, unseen servant is an unusual spell for me to address here, because it simply doesn't exist in any of Chainmail Fantasy, Original D&D, Basic/Expert D&D, etc., which is normally the focus of this blog. And yet, it serves as an important example to highlight the differences between those early works and the later AD&D project. In some sense, it is central to the current endeavor; hopefully you can see what I'm doing here. We must start with 1st Edition:


AD&D 1st Edition

Unseen Servant (Conjuration/Summoning)
 

Level: 1
Range: 0
Duration: 6 turns + 1 turn/level
Area of Effect: 3" radius of spell
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 segment
Saving Throw: None
caster

Explanation/Description: The unseen servant is a non-visible valet, a butler to step and fetch, open doors and hold chairs, as well as to clean and mend. The spell creates a force which is not strong, but which obeys the command of the magic-user. It can carry only light-weight items - a maximum of 200 gold pieces weight suspended, twice that amount moving across a relatively friction-free surface such as a smooth stone or wood floor. It can only open normal doors, drawers, lids, etc. The unseen servant cannot fight, nor can it be killed, as it is a force rather than a creature. It can be magically dispelled, or eliminated after taking 6 hit points of magical damage. The material components of the spell are a piece of string and a bit of wood.
With the 1st-level spell unseen servant, Gygax introduces into AD&D a spell that by all appearances is intended to not be useful in a combat or dungeon exploration any way. It cannot fight or carry heavy loads, and is apparently silent and cannot communicate any information. It only performs domestic chores. The DMG adds, "The created force has no shape, so it cannot be clothed" (p. 45).

In this sense, the game is now being expanded beyond its original dungeon and wilderness-looting (and sailing, flying, castle-besieging) focus, and is serving to depict a larger, more detailed world. Is that a good and useful thing, or is that a symptom of a system being stretched to the point of breakdown? It certainly serves to support literary gestures of the wizard who uses a variety of low-level magics to make his day easier -- like Merlyn in T.H. White's The Sword in the Stone, whose dishes dive into the sink and wash themselves on their own. (Now that I say that: Self-animated household objects are probably an even more generally common trope.)

We might look for more examples of this kind of "mundane" magic in the PHB's expanded list of spells (there are now 30 magic-user spells at the 1st level alone, up from just 8 in OD&D Vol-1), but they are relatively few. We might consider counting: mending, write, erase, and possibly Tenser's floating disc. The mending spell definitely fits the type (it's usable only on minimally broken mundane items, not magic); Tenser's floating disc does a mundane carrying job, but useful in a dungeon; while write and erase actually are both usable for magical writings. Note that these are all new to AD&D except for Tenser's floating disc, which first appeared in Holmes' (the other Holmes) Basic D&D set of 1977 (although Zenopus Archives informs us that it was not included in Holmes' original manuscript, so most likely it was added by Gygax in an editorial pass to create another link to the AD&D game).

Is it worthwhile for a character to use a fairly precious spell slot (even 1st-level) for such a mundane convenience? Well, I've certainly never seen a character do so. However, unseen servant is one of ten personal spells listed as being subject to the 8th-level spell permanency (PHB p. 91), and in this form I could imagine including as a piece of flavor for a high-level wizard.

Gygax actually double- and tripled-down on this design direction by inventing another large category of spells called "cantrips", 0-level spells for 0-level apprentice magic-users, which did other, even more limited mundane household tasks (one to chill a beverage, another to clean a carpet, another to dampen a washcloth, etc.; 72 in all). These were first introduced in 1982 via Dragon magazines #59-61 (using three sequential editions of "From the Sorceror's Scroll"), and then later included in Unearthed Arcana. Gygax writes in that first article:
I have often wondered why no player or DM has asked me about what apprentice magic-users actually do. The very thought always conjures up visions of Mickey Mouse having troubles with brooms marching endlessly with buckets of water — Walt Disney really outdid himself when he made Fantasia! That aside, I have always reasoned that apprentice dweomer-crafters had to fulfill the dual role of menial and student, performing chores all day and then studying late into the night. After a certain point, an apprentice would begin to acquire sufficient magical acumen to employ minor magics— mainly to lighten his burden of drudgery but also to create some amusement at times. The petty spells gained by an apprentice magic-user are cantrips.
Here we see both a reference to another example of the "animated houseware" trope as primary inspiration, and also a bit of a design tension; Gygax is creating a large body of rules text for which "no player or DM" has ever requested or seen any need. A paragraph later he writes, "Why not allow the magic-user the option of retaining cantrips? Would it unbalance play if a number of cantrips could be substituted for a single first-level spell?", after which he allows one 1st-level slot to be used in place of 4 cantrips. Which opens up a box of a few issues: Is unseen servant not a more generally useful technique? And can spell slots generally be traded for lower-level selections?

When compiled in Unearthed Arcana, Gygax also added a 2nd-level spell called protection from cantrips ("This spell is often used by a magic-user with mischievous apprentices, or one who wishes apprentices to clean or shine an area using elbow grease instead of magic."). I certainly never saw that get used (and frankly could not recall its existence until I started researching for this article).


AD&D 2nd Edition

Unseen Servant

(Conjuration/Summoning)
Range: 0
Duration: 1 hr. + 1 turn/level
Area of Effect: 30-ft. radius
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1
Saving Throw: None

The unseen servant is an invisible, mindless, and shapeless force, used to step and fetch, open unstuck doors, and hold chairs, as well as to clean and mend. It is not strong, but unfailingly obeys the command of the wizard. It can perform only one activity at a time and can move only lightweight items, carrying a maximum of 20 pounds or pushing/pulling 40 pounds across a smooth surface. It can open only normal doors, drawers, lids, etc. The unseen servant cannot fight, nor can it be killed, as it is a force rather than a creature. It can be magically dispelled, or eliminated after receiving 6 points of damage from area-effect spells, breath weapons, or similar attacks. If the caster attempts to send it beyond the allowed radius, the spell ends immediately.

The material components of the spell are a piece of string and a bit of wood.
I can't see any difference here; it seems like David Cook has found no compelling reason to adjust this spell in any way. However, one decision he did make was to edit down the 8 pages dedicated to cantrips in Unearthed Arcana, and consolidate those powers into a single 1st-level spell:

Cantrip
(All Schools)

Range: 10 ft.
Duration: 1 hr./level
Area of Effect: Special
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1
Saving Throw: None

Cantrips are minor spells studied by wizards during their apprenticeship, regardless of school. The cantrip spell is a practice method for the apprentice, teaching him how to tap minute amounts of magical energy. Once cast, the cantrip spell enables the caster to create minor magical effects for the duration of the spell. However, these effects are so minor that they have severe limitations. They are completely unable to cause a loss of hit points, cannot affect the concentration of spellcasters, and can only create small, obviously magical materials. Furthermore, materials created by a cantrip are extremely fragile and cannot be used as tools of any sort. Lastly, a cantrip lacks the power to duplicate any other spell effects.

Whatever manifestation the cantrip takes, it remains in effect only as long as the wizard concentrates. Wizards typically use cantrips to impress common folk, amuse children, and brighten dreary lives. Common tricks with cantrips include tinklings of ethereal music, brightening faded flowers, glowing balls that float over the caster's hand, puffs of wind to flicker candles, spicing up aromas and flavors of bland food, and little whirlwinds to sweep dust under rugs. Combined with the unseen servant spell, it's a tool to make housekeeping and entertaining simpler for the wizard.
In some sense, the multitude of possible effects, and the 1 hour/level duration makes this power much more useful than the 1E cantrips (their durations were commonly 1 turn, 1 round, or even just 1 segment). Note that Cook explicitly references unseen servant here, so the spells are seen as closely related. Protection from cantrips is still included as a 2nd-level spell.


D&D 3rd Edition

Unseen Servant

Conjuration (Creation)
Level: Brd 1, Sor/Wiz 1
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Effect: One invisible, mindless, shapeless servant
Duration: 1 hour/level
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No

The unseen servant is an invisible, mindless, shapeless force that performs simple tasks at the character's command. It can run and fetch things, open unstuck doors, and hold chairs, as well as clean and mend. The servant can perform only one activity at a time, but it repeats the same activity over and over again if told to do so. It has an effective Strength score of 2 (so it can lift 20 pounds or drag 100 pounds). It can trigger traps and such, but it can exert only 20 pounds of force. Its speed is 15 feet. The servant cannot attack in any way; it is never allowed an attack roll. It cannot be killed, but it dissipates if it takes 6 points of damage from area attacks. (It gets no saves against attacks.) If the character attempts to send it beyond the spell’s range (measured from the character's current position), the servant ceases to exist.
That's mostly the same. I do kind of like the extended 1 hour/level duration, if you're going to bother casting this at all.

On cantrips, 3rd Edition went in a different direction; it reinstituted them as 0-level spells, but with a limited selection, effects that were actually useful (even in adventuring contexts), and a separate spell slot listed for casters in just this category (for example: 1st-level wizards were given three 0-level, and one 1st-level spell before any bonuses). For wizards, the complete list of available cantrips was: resistance, ray of frost, detect poison, daze, flare, light, dancing lights, ghost sound, disrupt undead, mage hand, mending, open/close, arcane mark, detect magic, prestidigitation, and read magic. Some of these can do 1d3 or 1d6 damage, or give a ±1 modifier to a save or attack. Several others were 1st-level spells in prior editions, here made more easily accessible, so that's something. But the presence of a 0-level spell category seems fiddly and possibly confusing to new players (sit down, computer science majors). The "mundane magic" effects formerly identified as cantrips are now wrapped into the spell prestidigitation, shown below. There is no more protection from cantrips spell.

Prestidigitation

Universal
Level: Brd 0, Sor/Wiz 0
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 10 ft.
Target, Effect, or Area: See text
Duration: 1 hour
Saving Throw: See text
Spell Resistance: No

Once cast, the prestidigitation spell enables the character to perform simple magical effects for 1 hour. The effects are minor and have severe limitations. Prestidigitations can slowly lift 1 pound of material. They can color, clean, or soil items in a 1-foot cube each round. They can chill, warm, or flavor 1 pound of nonliving material. They cannot inflict damage or affect the concentration of spellcasters. Prestidigitation can create small objects, but they look crude and artificial. The materials created by a prestidigitation spell are extremely fragile, and they cannot be used as tools, weapons, or spell components. Finally, prestidigitation lacks the power to duplicate any other spell effects. Any actual change to an object (beyond just moving, cleaning, or soiling it) persists only 1 hour.


Conclusions

Is thematic but mundane magic, like unseen servant and cantrips, a useful thing to include in the D&D game? Or is the 9,000-plus words devoted to the subject by Gygax in Unearthed Arcana really a big waste of potential goodness? Did your players ever make much use of unseen servant and cantrip-like magic in your games?


Monday, February 6, 2017

Spells Through The Ages – Remove Curse

Voodo doll with pins
Let's say that something truly disastrous has befallen you. A real catastrophe. Something that you can't shake, can't get rid of, no matter how you try. Sinister, demonic powers have taken hold; that sort of thing. You've been well and truly cursed! How do you correct this state of affairs? Remove curse is the magic that you're looking for.


Original D&D 

Remove Curse: A spell to remove any one curse or evil sending. Note that using this spell on a "cursed sword", for example, would make the weapon an ordinary sword, not some form of enchanted blade. Range: Adjacent to the object.
In Original D&D, remove curse is 4th-level magic-user (wizard) spell, and a 3rd-level cleric spell. There are times when, as a spell of resuscitation and protection, I forget that it's on the magic-user list, but of course it actually appears there first in the book (Vol-1).

In OD&D Vol-2, there are basically only three cursed items: a cursed sword (-2), a cursed scroll (5 different possible effects), and a cursed ring (ring of weakness). Only the ring specifies that, "Once on the hand this ring cannot be removed without the application of a Remove Curse spell from a Cleric".

Generally speaking, in OD&D Supplement-I, Greyhawk, the magic item list was expanded such that any particular form of magic item had an analog that was cursed (I dare say: most of the new items in Sup-I are cursed items). The idiom of not being able to get rid of such items was used more widely there. The rule was applied to swords for the first time: "Once grasped, this weapon will never willingly leave the holder’s hand, and it will immediately force him to seek battle with as many monsters as possible. A Remove Curse or a Wish (Limited included) will remove the influence" (Sup-I, p. 46; note no restriction to clerics as for the original ring above). See also: ring of contrariness, bag of beans, drums of deafness, gauntlets of fumbling, etc., etc. In this context, having access to remove curse becomes much more critical.


Expert D&D

Remove Curse* 
Range: 0'
Duration: permanent
 

This spell will remove the effects of a curse put on a character or free a character from a cursed magical item. A remove curse spell will only remove one curse.

The reverse of this spell (curse) causes a misfortune or penalty to the creature upon which it is cast. Curses are limited only by the caster's imagination, but the DM may turn a curse that is too powerful back on the caster! Typical limits to curses include: -4 to hit, or -2 on saves, or prime requisite reduced by half, etc. A successful saving throw means the curse has no effect. There is no limit to the number of times a character can be cursed, provided each curse penalizes the character in a different way.
This language comes from the cleric spell list, while the magic-user version simply says, "This spell is exactly like the clerical spell of the same name (page X13)". The effect in this edition is basically the same, but the "evil sending" language is gone, and it refers directly only to cursed magical items.

The primary new feature, and most of the text, is now the ability to reverse the spell (indicated by the asterisk next to the title) and actually cast a curse on someone (permanently). This is available to both clerics and magic-users (one of only 6 reversible MU spells in the game); in OD&D it was not noted as being reversible for either class.

For logical flow, I'm in the habit of looking at the B/X branch of rules prior to the separate AD&D line; but despite that, it bears pointing out that Gygax's AD&D Player's Handbook came out in 1978, and Cook's D&D Expert Rules came out in 1980. So this is one of numerous instances where Cook was almost surely taking thematic direction from Gygax's AD&D work.


AD&D 1st Edition

Remove Curse (Abjuration) Reversible

Level: 3
Range: Touch
Duration: Permanent
Area of Effect: Special
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 6 segments
Saving Throw: Special


Explanation/Description: Upon casting this spell, the cleric is usually able to remove a curse - whether it be on an object, a person, or in the form of some undesired sending or evil presence. Note that the remove curse spell will not affect a cursed shield, weapon or suit of armor, for example, although the spell will typically enable the person afflicted with any such cursed item to be rid of it. The reverse of the spell is not permanent; the bestow curse lasts for 1 turn for every level of experience of the cleric using the spell. It will lower one ability of the victim to 3 (your DM will determine which by random selection) 50% of the time; reduce the victim’s “to hit” and saving throw probabilities by -4 25% of the time; or make the victim 50% likely per turn to drop whatever he, she, or it is holding (or simply do nothing in the case of creatures not using tools) 25% of the time. It is possible for a cleric to devise his or her own curse, and it should be similar in power to those shown. Consult your referee. The target of a bestow curse spell must be touched. If the victim is touched, a saving throw is still applicable and if it is successful, the effect is negated.
Again, the text above is from the clerical list (now alphabetically positioned first, in contrast to OD&D where wizards were given priority and clerics the after-thought); the magic-user listing also says it is identical (although still at 4th level). Among the reversals is the spell's effect on a permanent magic item: whereas in OD&D, it would actually "make the weapon an ordinary sword", that was in the time before such items were made universally "sticky" on the user; here, the spell will simply separate such an item from the user, and otherwise "not affect a cursed shield, weapon or suit of armor".

The reverse of the spell is a bit more formalized in its effect than in Cook's Expert rules -- a roll for exact effect. But that's very minor compared to the critical difference: Cook's curse is apparently permanent, while Gygax's bestow curse only lasts 1 turn per caster level. That's a big delta-value. I think I would tip my hat to Cook in this regard; it's both briefer text and makes the spell at least hypothetically interesting (I've never seen it get used in-game; certainly not for a few-turns duration).

Edit: Another difference being the effect of the ability-score penalty. At first glance I thought the penalty here was lowering an ability score by 3, but it's actually lowering it to 3 (i.e., the minimum allowed score). That's really punishing, but I can see that as making thematic sense for a curse. Cook had a somewhat more moderate lowering of the prime requisite by half. (Thanks to JB in the comments.)

The AD&D DMG specifies that remove curse may be used by a cleric of at least 12th level on a transformed lycanthrope to remove that condition. Apparently that may only be attempted once, after which more severe measures must be taken.


AD&D 2nd Edition

Remove Curse
(Abjuration)
Reversible

Range: Touch
Duration: Permanent
Area of Effect: Special
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 4
Saving Throw: Special

Upon casting this spell, the wizard is usually able to remove a curse--whether it is on an object, on a person, or in the form of some undesired sending or evil presence. Note that the remove curse spell cannot affect a cursed shield, weapon, or suit of armor, for example, although it usually enables a person afflicted with a cursed item to be rid of it. Certain special curses may not be countered by this spell, or may be countered only by a caster of a certain level or higher. A caster of 12th level or higher can cure lycanthropy with this spell by casting it on the animal form. The were-creature receives a saving throw vs. spell and, if successful, the spell fails and the wizard must gain a level before attempting the remedy again.

The reverse of the spell is not permanent; the bestow curse lasts one turn for every experience level of the wizard casting the spell. It causes one of the following effects (roll percentile dice):


It is possible for a wizard to devise his own curse, and it should be similar in power to those given (the DM has final say). The subject of a bestow curse spell must be touched. If the subject is touched, a saving throw is still applicable; if it is successful, the effect is negated. The bestowed curse cannot be dispelled.
Mostly this is copy-and-pasted from 1E. The DMG detail on use against lycanthropy has been inserted. The text description of the possible effects has been presented as a table. Cook has faithfully followed Gygax's short duration for the bestow curse effect (in contrast to his earlier presentation in the D&D Expert rules).


D&D 3rd Edition

Remove Curse
Abjuration
Level: Brd 3, Clr 3, Sor/Wiz 4
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Touch
Target: Creature or item touched
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)

Remove curse instantaneously removes all curses on an object or a person. Remove curse does not remove the curse from a cursed shield, weapon, or suit of armor, although the spell typically enables the person afflicted with any such cursed item to remove and get rid of it. Certain special curses may not be countered by this spell or may be countered only by a caster of a certain level or higher. Remove curse counters and dispels bestow curse.
Same spell, same name, same effects, same levels, close to the same phrasing since 1E. One difference is that 3E made the move to delete the idea of "reversible" spells, instead splitting those off to separate entries entirely, to wit:

Bestow Curse
Transmutation
Level: Brd 3, Clr 3, Sor/Wiz 4
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Touch
Target: Creature touched
Duration: Permanent
Saving Throw: Will negates
Spell Resistance: Yes

The character places a curse on the creature touched. The character chooses one of the three  following effects:
  • -6 effective decrease to an ability score (minimum 1).
  • -4 enhancement penalty on attack rolls, saving throws, ability checks, and skill checks.
  • Each turn, the target has a 50% chance to act normally; otherwise, the target takes no action.
The character may also invent the a new curse, but it should be no more powerful than those listed above, and the DM has final say on the curse's effect.

The curse cannot be dispelled, but it can be removed with a break enchantment, limited wish, miracle, remove curse, or wish spell.

Bestow curse counters remove curse.
In contrast to 3E's usual softening of spell effects, the bestow curse has gotten tougher in at least one sense: it is back to being permanent in duration (seen previously only in Cook's Expert rules). On the other hand, more as we we expect from 3E, the ability-score penalty has been lessened: only lowering by 6, as opposed to dropping to the minimum value (thanks again to JB in comments). Also, the effect is now chosen by the caster (not rolled randomly).


Conclusions

The most interesting adjustment to the remove curse effect itself was near the beginning, when between 0E and 1E the standard for cursed items was to become "sticky" on the user, and the remove curse effect would only separate item from person, not eliminate the curse on the item itself. Past that, most of the rule text was actually devoted to the reverse bestow curse effect, which itself mostly stable, except for differences in whether the duration was very short or permanent.

I must admit, I don't think that I've ever had bestow curse used in any of my games. Certainly not by any PCs. In the context of fast-paced combat, it's not an incredibly useful effect (especially when it needs to be delivered by a touch, something most wizards would prefer not to risk). We might consider it as a nice thematic effect for an NPC to use (say, an abused old witch or warlock), but for that we really need the permanent version, only seen in the Expert and 3rd Edition rules.

In my Book of Spells, I reverted to the D&D original conception, and in fact I removed all reversible effects from the system (only two for magic-users there in the first place); so bestow curse is not an option (although it could be an out-of-book specially researched option, of course). How often does remove curse and/or bestow curse get used in your games?

Monday, January 30, 2017

Spells Through The Ages – Transmute Rock to Mud

Bearded man in mud up to shoulders
Let's say you have a formerly firm establishment and you want to collapse the whole thing; your preference to have it be a big sludgy morass instead. Degrade your opponents via a real mud-slinging contest. How to do that? Well, of course: transmute rock to mud is your huckleberry.


Original D&D 

Transmute Rock to Mud: The spell takes effect in one turn, turning earth, sand, and of course, rock to mud. The area affected is up to 30 square inches. Creatures moving into the mud will become mired, possibly sinking if heavy enough or losing 90% of movement otherwise, unless able to fly or levitate. The spell can only be countered by reversing the incantation (requiring a Transmute Rock to Mud spell) or by normal process of evaporation (3-18 days as determined by rolling three six-sided dice). Range: 12".
This spell was not ever included in Chainmail Fantasy -- which is a bit surprising, because to my eye it looks tailor-made for an outdoors mass-combat use case. (Compare to: move earth, et. al.) So we start with Original D&D (5th level spell); as shown above, the primary thrust of the spell seems to be in creating a large muddy field to obstruct the progress of one's enemies. While a surface area is given, no depth is mentioned; so it might be unclear whether victims can possibly drown or not.

The duration is a little unusual for two different reasons. One is that it is the first magic-user spell in the game to imply that it can be "reversed" to create its opposite effect. There is no general rule for this in OD&D; and in fact it is only one of two such magic-user spells which allow that (the other: stone to flesh at 6th-level). This is in contrast to about half the spells on the clerical list which are underlined, indicating that they are (automatically) reversed by evil clerics.

The second oddity being the fact that over many days the effect may just wear off naturally; I don't think that there's any other spell in the game that functions likewise. In the Swords & Spells master table, the duration is listed as "full game".


Expert D&D 

Transmute Rock to Mud
Range: 120'
Duration: 3-18 days
 

This spell changes a volume of rock up to 3,000 square feet and 10' deep, to a morass of mud. Creatures entering the area of mud may be mired and are slowed to l/10th of their normal movement speed.

The reverse of this spell (transmute mud to rock) changes up to 3,000 square feet of mud (10' deep) to rock. The effect of this reversed version is permanent.

Cook's version in Expert D&D is almost identical. The 3-18 days duration here would most likely be interpreted as a (very weird, very random) duration for the magic itself, not an effect of natural evaporation. The effect on earth and sand is not mentioned. Cook does give a depth figure for the first time -- a fixed 10', so one might think that drowning is a possibility, but the effect otherwise specified seems to only indicate slow movement (swimming?).

Note that Expert D&D does have a general system for reversal of both magic-user and clerical spells,  indicated by an asterisk in the spell rosters -- many such clerical spells are given (as above), but still fairly few magic user spells (6 spells out of a total of 72 by my count).


AD&D 1st Edition

Transmute Rock To Mud (Alteration) Reversible
 

Level: 5 
Range: 1"/level 
Duration: Special 
Area of Effect: 2 cubic "/level
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 5 segments
Saving Throw: None

Explanation/Description: Except as noted above, and that the material components for the spell are clay and water (or sand, lime and water for the reverse), this spell is the same as the fifth level druid spell, transmute rock to mud.
The druid spell description saying this:
Explanation/Description: This spell turns natural rock of any sort into an equal volume of mud. The depth of the mud can never exceed one-half its length and/or breadth. If it is cast upon a rock, for example, the rock affected will collapse into mud. Creatures unable to levitate, fly, or otherwise free themselves from the mud will sink and suffocate, save for lightweight creatures which could normally pass across such ground. The mud will remain until a dispel magic spell or a reverse of this spell, mud to rock, restores its substance - but not necessarily its form. Evaporation will turn the mud to normal dirt, from 1 to 6 days per cubic 1" being required. The exact time depends on exposure to sun, wind and normal drainage. The mud to rock reverse will harden normal mud into soft stone (sandstone or similar mineral) permanently unless magically changed.

We see that as in Cook's work, the effect on non-rocky earth and sand seems to be removed. The area is now actually a volume, variable by level (as for most spells in AD&D), and the depth is now an algebraic calculation based on min(length, breadth)/2, subject to available volume. Sinking and suffocating are explicated for the first time. Evaporation is now made even more vague for the DM ("depends on exposure to sun, wind and normal drainage"; I prefer the flat 3d6 roll if we must do that). A description of the effect on a single discrete "rock" is given for the first time, as well.

The DM's Guide gives this additional errata/information:
Transmute Rock To Mud:  Rate of sinking is  1'  per segment, i.e.  1'  per  6 seconds or  10' per minute (round). Brush thrown upon the surface will stop sinking of creatures able to climb atop it (use discretion  as  to the amount of brush and the weight of creatures). Ropes can be used to pull creatures out of the mire, assuming that sufficient power  is  available  -  1 man/man, 10 men/horse (or vice versa).

In 1986 Doug Niles' Dungeoneer's Survival Guide included a section on running Battlesystem engagements in the depths of the underworld (recall that Niles was himself the author of the well-received Battlesystem supplement for D&D). In a subsection on "Cave-ins On A Battlefield", he writes (p. 35):
Spells such as earthquake and transmute rock to mud are commonly used for this purpose. If a ceiling collapses, the area affected on the ground is the same as the area of the ceiling collapsed, plus 1" in all directions. Such a collapse does 6d8 hit points of damage to all creatures in the area of effect; a saving throw vs. spell reduces the damage to half. Thus, an orc figure representing 10 orcs suffers 60 dice of damage, and is automatically destroyed whether it saves or not.

A similar weight of mud falling on a unit inflicts only  4d8 points of damage, again halved if a saving throw is successful. 
While that's a logical extrapolation of the spell's effect, I'm not sure that I'm entirely satisfied by that. More on that thread below. 

AD&D 2nd Edition

Transmute Rock to Mud
(Alteration)
Reversible

Range: 10 yds./level
Duration: Special
Area of Effect: 20-ft. cube/level
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 5
Saving Throw: None

This spell turns natural rock of any sort into an equal volume of mud. The depth of the mud can never exceed half its length or breadth. If it is cast upon a rock, for example, the rock affected collapses into mud. Creatures unable to levitate, fly, or otherwise free themselves from the mud sink at the rate of 10 feet per round and suffocate, except for lightweight creatures that could normally pass across such ground. Brush thrown atop the mud can support creatures able to climb on top of it, with the amount of brush required subject to the DM's discretion. The mud remains until a dispel magic spell or a reverse of this spell, mud to rock, restores its substance--but not necessarily its form. Evaporation turns the mud to normal dirt, at the rate of 1d6 days per 10 cubic feet. The mud to rock reverse can harden normal mud into soft stone (sandstone or similar mineral) permanently unless magically changed.

The material components for the spell are clay and water (or sand, lime, and water for the reverse).
This is mostly another copy-and paste job from the 1E text, with the detail from the DMG about sinking rate and use of brush for floatation inserted. The duration is again given as due to evaporation, but the factors affecting that in 1E are removed, at least for the wizard version -- in the alternate priest spell, it is still there ("The exact time depends on exposure to the sun, wind, and normal drainage.").


D&D 3rd Edition

Transmute Rock to Mud
Transmutation

Level: Drd 5, Sor/Wiz 5
Components: V, S, M/DF
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Area: Up to two 10-ft. cubes/level (S)
Duration: Permanent (see text)
Saving Throw: See text
Spell Resistance: No

This spell turns natural, uncut or unworked rock of any sort into an equal volume of mud. Magical or enchanted stone is not affected by the spell. The depth of the mud created cannot exceed 10 feet. Creatures unable to levitate, fly, or otherwise free themselves from the mud sink until hip- or chest-deep, reducing their speed to 5 feet and giving them –2 penalties on attack rolls and AC. Brush thrown atop the mud can support creatures able to climb on top of it. Creatures large enough to walk on the bottom can wade through the area at a speed of 5 feet.

If transmute rock to mud is cast upon the ceiling of a cavern or tunnel, the mud falls to the floor and spreads out in a pool at a depth of 5 feet. The falling mud and the ensuing cave-in deal 8d6 points of damage to anyone caught directly beneath the area, or half damage to those who succeed at Reflex saves.

Castles and large stone buildings are generally immune to the effects of the spell, since transmute rock to mud can’t affect worked stone and doesn’t reach deep enough to undermine such buildings’ foundations. However, small buildings or structures often rest upon foundations shallow enough to be damaged or even partially toppled by this spell.

The mud remains until a successful dispel magic or transmute mud to rock spell restores its substance —but not necessarily its form. Evaporation turns the mud to normal dirt over a period of days. The exact time depends on exposure to the sun, wind, and normal drainage.

Here's the 3rd Edition version of the spell; longer (as usual), but mostly the same -- in terms of volume, duration, use of brush, evaporation, and factors effecting evaporation (most of that copied forward from the 1st Ed rules). In the standard 3rd Ed. safety-bumpering, the possibility of suffocation (seen in 1st-2nd Ed.) has been removed, and victims can at most "sink until hip- or chest-deep", even though no rational mechanic for that is given.

But probably the most important changeover the entire evolution of the spell happens in the first line here: it is limited, for the first time, to working against "natural, uncut or unworked rock". That's a pretty big change, whose details are spelled out in the 3rd paragraph. We might think that a pretty common-use case is for a band of heroes or villains to be confronted by an opposing keep and think: "Hey, that castle's stone. If we just cast one transmute rock to mud, that whole gatehouse will just collapse, right?" In the 1E era, I definitely thought that was the implication, even though it was never specified in any version of the spell. Here that is prohibited due to the "unworked" clause, and I actually really like that.

I actually really like that limitation to the spell. I'm actually kind of befuddled as to why that was never addressed in any earlier edition. Separately, there's the also the detail in the 2nd paragraph about collapsing the roofs of underworld tunnels and causing 8d6 damage cave-ins (save for half); this seems very reminiscent of Doug Niles' rule in the 1E Dungeoneer's Survival Guide, but it's unclear if the rule was imported directly from there. At any rate, I'm not sure I like that so much.


Gygaxian Perspective

Let me expand upon that issue in its own section. What would Gygax's intent be regarding transmute rock to mud against stone fortifications? For starters, the overwhelming evidence is that Gygax conceives of the standard D&D game world as being essentially quasi-medieval in nature, and I support that. Radical changes in the game world society cannot be inferred from one or two whacked-out spell descriptions; rather, if a certain magic effect inherently contradicts the medieval world situation, then something about the spell needs to be adjusted to comply with that initial assumed milieu. (OD&D Vol-1, p. 5: "expansion is recommended only at such time as the possibilities in the medieval aspect have been thoroughly explored").

For example: Gygax's second novel, Greyhawk Adventures: Artifact of Evil opens with a major assault on a concentric stone castle at the edge of the Pomarj (a region overrun by evil humanoids; setting of the A1-4 Slave Lords series of modules). In addition to legions of men and monsters, fairly large contingents of spell-casters are engaged on both sides of the battle. From the first paragraph of the book:
The starless night was suddenly bright with globes of glowing light, radiance that shed betraying illumination behind the lines of besiegers outside the fortress... The magic missiles, blazing fireballs, and crackling bolts of lightning were far worse. Bodies were tossed high by roaring blasts; wheeled shelters were split and broken by the flashing strokes of electricity while metal-clad men-at-arms behind them became charred corpses. Varicolored darts sped unerringly into hapless targets who screamed and died. Torrents of flame erupted from the sky to set siege towers blazing, giant torches that added a hellish light to the scene, while raging fires swept over the advancing lines or made curtains of flame that seared their flesh.
Other magic effects that are thrown from either side over the course of the next few pages: summon elementals (fire), Evard's black tentacles, chain lightning, cone of cold (?), darkness, moonbeam, precipitation, cloudburst, summon elemental (water), summon elemental (earth), major illusions, etc.

That's a lot of high-level magic. But one thing that doesn't happen: at no point are the walls of the castle transmuted from rock to mud. That's hard to interpret if Gygax thinks the effect is feasible, in the context of such an enormous force of high-level spell-casters. Likewise: Note that the 1E DMG had a table including about 10 magical effects that would cause structural point damage against constructions in a siege (p. 109), but transmute rock to mud was not among them.

More evidence from the old Gygax Q&A thread on ENWorld (dates uncertain): One poster proposes a plan of action in regards to the famed Temple of Elemental Evil: "One mage with a Rock to Mud could take out the whole place..." (going on for about 9 paragraphs about the detail of volume of mud involved , effect on lower levels, etc.). Here's Gygax's response:

My players know better than to try something sure to incur wrath >:-)

Such tactics are a matter for the DM to manage, and as one here is how I would handle an attempt of this sort.

"Sorry, Flubspell, but your Rock to Mud casting seems to fizzle out when it contacts the stonework of the temple. golly, I guess the builders must have imbued it with some fort of protection from this sort of assault on its integrity..."

"Oh, by the by, it seems that you are now turning a ghastly gray color. It seems as if yout attempt has invoked a curse of some sort, as you feel quite weak and not at all well..."

I'd use the same sort of response if someone tried that with any important campaign setting. To stop the rules lawyers from their shrill protests I's write up a few spells to cover constructions--anti-disintigration, anti-rock to mud, etc. Also a few retributive spells to be activated and aimed unerringly at any spell caster attempting to bring down a stricture by that sort or obvious and predicatble tactic. Just because such spells are not included in the standard roster doesn't mean they don't exist.

Cheers,

Gary

So as expressed earlier, Gygax does not look at a spell like transmute rock to mud and deduce that medieval stone fortifications are passé in the D&D campaign world. Rather, he takes as a given that castles exist in the game (and dungeons!) and instead extrapolates that there must be a rather wide array of protection and "retributive" spells commonly used upon such constructions. Not just for the Temple of Elemental Evil itself, but explicitly "any important campaign setting", which I would argue would include any fortification set down by the DM in the campaign world.

I think all of that comes from an honorable instinct. The one thing on which I tend to differ with Gygax is that the implied array of defensive spells (outside any rulebook) seems to commit the offense of "multiplying entities beyond necessity". I would prefer a more minimalist solution, by simply adjusting the originally offending spell a slight bit -- and I think (somewhat unusually) that the 3rd Ed. limitation to "natural, uncut or unworked rock" is a pretty elegant piece of editorial wisdom. I even take an extra step in my own Book of Spells and further prohibit use of the spell against any "load-bearing" stone, so as to cut out the tunnel (and dungeon) cave-in usage.

May I also point out that Gygax's sarcastic reference to the transmuter "Flubspell" here (sometime in the early 2000's), is reminiscent of a character identified as "Flubbit the Wizard" back in OD&D Sup-I (1976; see the magic mouth spell description on p. 22). 


Conclusion 

Which form of the spell is your favorite? Did actually prefer more chaos in your world, such that that transmute rock to mud works on fortifications and makes them effectively a useless piece of technology?