The AD&D 2e reaction table is... interesting:
Compare it to the BECMI reaction table, discussed here.
The tables are different for several reasons, but the main distinction is that the AD&D 2e table requires you to check the player characters' attitude before finding out how the monster behaves, while every other D&D table I can remember goes the opposite way: first consider the die roll, then check how the monsters behave.
Of course, in practice you can always ask how the PC's react first (or ignore the rection roll altogether, etc.). But I think it would be better to rely on initiative here - if the PC's have the initiative, they can choose to show they're friendly before the monsters decide how to react, which would certainly give them some advantage in the reaction roll.
If they LOSE initiative, the monsters "react" first - but if they are uncertain, this gives the PC's another chance to make a peaceful gesture, etc.
Another interesting aspect of the 2e table is that it can result in flight. This makes some sense as the table is affected by morale modifiers. A curious idea! Should scared monsters be friendlier? It makes some sense if they are intelligent, otherwise they should just run away if they can (which is the case if PCs are hostile).
Unfortunately, the actual morale score is irrelevant here; a monster with morale 18 and other with morale 10 are both as likely to flight or be hostile.
Curiously, since chaotic creatures have -1 to morale checks for some reason (they are probably more cowardly and less organized), they are also more likely to be friendly, which is a mistake IMO.
Overall, the 2e table is not any clearer or better than other tables, but it has several advantages we can use - and a few disadvantages I'd like to change.
It feels too friendly to "indifferent" PCs, do not contain immediate attacks, and is organized in a 4x19 grid instead of the usual 5 entries. It also seems to lack a "cautious" column that should be the default for PCs, with equal chances of friendliness and hostility.
Maybe my ideal 2d10 table would be smaller, containing a single column instead of a grid. Give the PCs a -1 if they manage to show they're friendly before you roll (e.g., if they win initiative); let he "speaker" or "leader" make any kind of Charisma "check" you feel appropriate to change this to -2 [simply including the charisma modifier feels too extreme, IMO; it would make everyone your friend].
If they are hostile or attack, roll with +1 to +2 (it is unlikely you need to roll after the PCs attack).
2–3. Friendly
4–6. Positive
7–10. Curious
11–13. Indifferent
14–16. Suspicious
17–18. Negative
19–20. Hostile (fight or flight - morale check)
As you can see, I added morale only to the last entry. But you can also use it whenever intelligent NPCs feel threatened or unable to escape, to see if they negotiate or surrender.
This is not much better than the original 2d6 table. Except that 2d10 allows you some extra room to give +2 and -2 modifiers. Maybe a simpler version would be better:
2–4. Friendly
5–7. Positive, indifferent
8–12. Cautious curiosity
13–16. Negative, suspicious, aggressive
17–20. Hostile (fight or flight - morale check if needed)
But then again, I've written about this before... more than once!
So I'll leave this as a small post about 2e reaction, and point you to some older posts about reaction rolls in general:
I like this table a lot and use it in my AD&D1 game. Like you, I feel it's somewhat generous on the "indifferent" and perhaps even on the "friendly" columns, and have implemented minor changes. Unlike what you feel about this requiring the PCs to "act first to show their intentions" I never had any problems, and what I do on "flee" results is to have the opponents immediately roll for morale with appropriate modifiers, and if they fail, then they flee.
ReplyDeleteThis table actually also feeds into a nice 2nd ed mechanic to "influence" NPCs etc... by granting PCs the ability to shift the NPCs reactions one full category - not just one line - up or down when successfully using some skill. ADD2 has this for bards influencing crowds and rangers influencing wild beasts, but you can extend it to other skills, like Diplomacy, Haggling, etc... and I even used it to house-rule on the UA rules for Comeliness, with high Com PCs being able to shift reaction categories of NPCs of the opposing sex with Wis 2/3 or less of their Com (instead of the UA rules that are overpowered imo).
Never thought of adding a Cautious column, but that's a great idea!
I really like the idea of allowing PCs to influence the result with their skills/actions instead of just giving them a flat Charisma bonus!
DeleteThe mechanic is actually very simple. The character must fulfill some circumstancial conditions (the ranger must approach the wild animal in advance of the party, moving slowly, making calming gestures, the bard mus have the chance to interact with the NPCs at the tavern for a few minutes, singing or telling a story and arguing, etc...), and the target is then required to make a save vs. spell modified by -1 for every full 3 levels of the character (-1 for level 3 to 5, -2 for level 6 to 8, etc...), failure means the character can shift the reaction category one step towards his goal, from Indifferent to Friendly, for example.
DeleteWe extend this to plenty of skills, and simply make equivalences, for instance, Friendly in a Haggling situation might mean a full 1d3 x 10% discount, etc... a Hostile result means the King suspects some treachery or manipulation and reacts very badly to the character in a Diplomacy situation, etc...