|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 25, 2009 22:16:18 GMT -6
[EDIT]I've compiled these in a PDF that matches the OD&D trade dress. You can download here: www.grey-elf.com/dnd/fs.pdf[/EDIT] This is a topic that's come up a lot around these boards, and is what originally inspired me to write S&S to begin with. But while S&S is a sharp system, it's nowhere near the answer to this question. And unfortunately, while a lot of us have thrown out basic theories, nobody's really come up with anything comprehensive. So I thought I'd hash it out here now that my understanding of the whole thing is coming along. Blocks of text in italics, offset with the word "Note," are options culled from reading, interpretation, or common sense, but not spelled out in the rules. They can be used or ignored at will. Here's my prototype of how this works. Reconciling AC and Chainmail Attack and Defense RatingsIn Chainmail there are the following classifications of troops (excluding arquibusiers, or primitive riflemen, and culture-specific troops): - Light Foot
- Heavy Foot
- Armored Foot
- Archers
- Crossbowmen
- Long bowmen
- Heavy Crossbowmen
- Light Horse
- Medium Horse
- Heavy Horse
In OD&D, there are eight classes of armor, ranging from AC 9 (no armor or shield) to AC 2 (Plate armor AND shield) ( Men and Magic, page 19). In Men and Magic, characters attack as x number of "Men," or "Heroes" or "Superheroes". Page 24 of Underworld and Wilderness Adventures reads as follows: Okay, seems simple enough, but here's where we run into problems. Problem 1: What constitutes a "Man"? This is unclear by the rules on their face. Problem 2: Which system is meant to be used? The 20:1 combat system, the Man to Man system, or the Fantasy Supplement system? The answer to Problem 2 is tied up in Problem 1. What constitutes a "Man" is clarified in Chainmail, though you have to dig for it--it's not obvious. On the Fantasy Reference Table (page 43 in the 3rd edition), the asterisked footnote defining what a "Hero" is clarifies that a "Man" is equivalent to "Either Heavy Foot, Armored Foot, Light Horse, etc., depending on arms and situations..." Okay, so "depending on arms and situations" now becomes the crux of our problem. But not really, as DM fiat is common, accepted, and expected in OD&D. The trick is dividing up armor and arms into the categories we looked at above. Infantry / FootmenCHAINMAIL isn't much help in this area as it doesn't clarify what exactly constitutes Light, Heavy and Armored foot, just what statistics they use in game. So we're back to our 8 AC ratings. At the two farthest ends of the spectrum--no armor and plate + shield--we clearly have Light Foot and Armored Foot. Probably safe to call Chain Mail and Chain + Shield Heavy Foot. We can divvy it up this way: Light Foot: AC 9-6 (No Armor through Leather & Shield) Heavy Foot: AC 5-4 (Chain through Chain & Shield) Armored Foot: AC 3-2 (Plate and Plate & Shield) OR...even better, if we want shields to make a difference, this way: Light Foot: AC 9-7 (No Armor through Leather) Heavy Foot: AC 6-5 (Leather + Shield and Chain) Armored Foot: AC 4-2 (Chain + Shield through Plate + Shield) Note: If we really want to keep pushing it, Plate and Shield could subtract one from the opponent's dice for defense; there's precedent for that sort of thing in Chainmail, though an opponent should never have fewer than 1 die. But we'll leave that as an "optional rule" for now.Let's further state that, looking at the Man-to-Man table, weapons with a class of 1 reduce the rank of the wearer by 1, to a minimum of Light foot, for purposes of attacking. Thus, a character with Chainmail, but wielding only two hand axes, still defends as Heavy Foot, but attacks as Light Foot. Similarly, a character clad in only leather armor but wielding a heavy, 2-handed claymore in grand Braveheart style, might attack as heavy or even armored foot, while still defending as light. The above are general suggestions and guidelines from careful reading and interpretation. Every DM will have to make their own call. After the DM rules on the issue, players should note their attack and defense classes on their character sheet. Cavalry and ArchersCavalry works the same way, but is dependent upon the size of the horse (light, medium or heavy), the type of barding it wears, and the armor worn by the rider. Archery is determined by the type of bow being used, but an archer's defense is dependent upon its armor. Note: Optionally, unless he drops the bow and draws a melee weapon, no archer except a crossbowman or heavy crossbowman can defend as anything better than Light Foot, and plate armor makes it impossible to fire anything besides a crossbow.
Likewise, at the DM's option, if a crossbowman opts to defend as Armored Foot without drawing a melee weapon, his crossbow may be destroyed, having been used to defend against attacks. Another few "optional" rules culled from interpretation and common sense.Choosing a SystemOkay, so how does this all come together? What system do we use? The answer: We use All Three. The big mistake often made when trying to work this out is deciding on a single system. What they forget is that D&D in the early days was a mishmash of sub-systems designed in a toolkit, "whatever works for the situation" philosophy. There's nothing wrong with combining the three subsystems in Chainmail, and my suspicion is that's exactly what Gygax and Arneson intended. |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 25, 2009 22:17:38 GMT -6
The Standard Chainmail System
Missile fire is always resolved first in this system. Consult the Missile Fire table on page 11, and throw a number of dice appropriate to the weapon's rate of fire, with target numbers determined by the character's "Man Equivalent," (OD&D p. 17-18, Chainmail, p. 11-12). The listed casualty numbers instead become the number of dice of damage dealt to the foe. Thus, a first level Fighting Man firing a bow at an unarmored foe rolls a die; on a result of 3-6 he deals a die of damage. The same character at level 5 will always inflict at least 2 dice of damage to an unarmored opponent, but may inflict 3 dice if he gains a result of 3-6. This fact makes missile weapons quite deadly and attractive for use by player characters; the main difference between types of missile weapons is their range. For this reason, DMs may wish to opt for the Man to Man missile fire system (see below), while maintaining the standard system for melee.
Note: I am of the opinion that "Number Firing" on the "1/2 Armor or Shield" column should read 1 under 1-3 and 2 under 4-6 instead of being 2 and 2; not having seen errata for Chainmail, I can't be 100% certain of this, but it seems to match the other progressions, and I suspect it's a typo on its face.
To resolve melee combat in the standard system, characters throw dice based upon their attacker rating vs. a defender's defense rating as shown on page 40 of Chainmail. Round dice up, so that all characters throw at least one die. Bonuses are pips added to or subtracted from all dice thrown, always using the more advantageous rating in normal combat.
Thus, a first level Fighting Man fighting as Light Foot (Man +1), attacking an orc which defends as Heavy Foot, throws a single die and adds one to the total, even though the table lists Lt. vs. Hvy as "1 die per two men." As per the combat table, if he gets a result of 6, he scores a hit and deals 1d6 damage to his foe as in Men and Magic, page 19.
The same character at third level, attacking as "3 Men or Hero -1" would in this case throw two dice, with no bonus to either, as this is more advantageous than the Hero -1 which would see two dice thrown, subtracting one from each. If one comes up 6, he deals 1 die of damage. If both come up 6, he deals 2 dice of damage.
However, when moving to the Fantasy Combat Table, which we'll get to later, the character would attack as a Hero, subtracting 1 from his 2d6 roll.
It's just that simple: consult the Combat Tables on page 40, roll an appropriate number of dice, and count "hits."
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 25, 2009 22:28:31 GMT -6
The Man to Man System
For epic, heroic, one-on-one battles, use the Man to Man System. It's straightforward and easy, and completely ignores the "Heavy foot, light foot," etc. designations, focusing only on the exact weapons and armor of the combatants.
Like the Standard System, missile fire is resolved first. To resolve this, see the "Individual Fires with Missiles" table; target numbers for each AC at three range increments are listed. For game balance purposes, this is preferable to the Standard System, if slower when rolling multiple attacks, as it allows for even higher level characters (and missile-firing monsters) to miss. Note that in the Man to Man system, missile fire is based not upon the "Man" rating of the character, but on the weapon's rate of fire and the opponent's armor.
For melee combat in this system, "Man" as defined on the Level Progression Charts in Men and Magic, simply refers to the number of attacks granted in a round. Thus, a third level Fighting Man, a Swordsman, gains three attacks. Since a "Hero" is defined in Chainmail as having "the fighting ability of four figures," (p. 30), we can count "Hero" as "4 Men."
Using the Man to Man system, any time the progression reads "x Men," that trumps a "Hero" or "Superhero" designation. Thus, "5 Men," or 5 attacks, trumps "Hero + 1," which would be four attacks all at +1.
However, if the progression does NOT list a "Men" designation, go with what's there. Thus, the seventh-level Champion, which doesn't say "7 Men," must fight as a Superhero -1. Superheroes are, according to Chainmail, "about twice as powerful" as Heroes (p. 30), which means that they grant eight attacks (in the case of a Champion, all at -1).
Monsters such as Halflings, Sprites, Dwarves, Gnomes, Kobolds, Orcs, Goblins, Elves, Heroes, Super Heroes, Trolls, Ogres, and even Giants can be engaged, with the DM improvising arms and armor based on their "Men" rating. Of course, all of these figures should gain hit dice as Fighting Men equivalent to said rating. A Giant, for example, fights as 12 Men, and thus should have 12 Hit Dice! Generally speaking, the hit dice totals listed in Monsters & Treasure will suffice. The DM will need to entirely improvise the "Man" ratings of monsters not listed in Chainmail.
Certain monsters--those very powerful creatures with Supernatural bents such as Dragons, Elementals, Treants, Wraiths, Wights, Ghouls, etc., may not--at the DM's option--be engaged by characters of below Hero status, these young adventurers having no chance to damage such monsters. We will deal with such creatures when we get to the Fantasy Combat Table.
That's basically it. Figure the weapons and armor of the combatants, calculate the number of attacks each has, and use the Man to Man system as written.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 25, 2009 22:28:56 GMT -6
The Fantasy Supplement
The Fantasy Reference Table and Fantasy Combat Table (Chainmail, pp. 43-44) come into play only when fighting specific, high-fantasy creatures. As it stands, only those creatures listed upon the Fantasy Combat Table use this system, though the DM can add others from Monsters & Treasure if he feels the need and they seem equivalent to those already present.
No character with a rating below "Hero" can attempt combat on the Fantasy Table (though characters with "Hero -1" status can try, excepting creatures that require a Hero to roll 12 to hit, such as Dragons).
The Fantasy Combat Table works on a single (not multiple) roll of 2d6, with a target number gained by cross referencing the character with the defending creature. To repeat: characters battling on the Fantasy Combat Table do NOT gain multiple attacks.
Note: This makes Fantasy Combat somewhat drawn out--DMs may wish to offset this by allowing multiple dice of damage equivalent to the character's rating, or half that to limit massive damage--i.e. a Hero will do 4d6 damage instead of just 1d6, or 2d6 damage if the DM opts for half rating (a Hero is worth 4 men).
Unless specified in the creature's description (a Hero must use a bow to attack a dragon, for example), ranged vs. melee attacks make no difference in the Fantasy Supplement combat rules.
Combat progresses in this manner until one side retreats, surrenders, or dies. In many ways, the Fantasy Table is the simplest form of combat; it just doesn't work for more "Mundane" creatures, who have to use the Standard or Man to Man rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 25, 2009 22:29:38 GMT -6
So that about covers it...my take on how Chainmail is intended for use as OD&D's "default" combat system (or systems, as the case may be).
Discussion? Any takers?
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Apr 26, 2009 6:10:26 GMT -6
Wow!  Jason, for this thread and all of your thoughts on this you deserve a whole series of EXALTS. (I'll give you one now and maybe a few more later "just because.") I've been putting together notes on this very topic for my Chainmail OD&D campaign. Yours is written better than mine, but otherwise we're quite similar in our thinking. Some of my own thoughts. 1. As far as Attack/Defense ratings go, I always found the comparison of footmen to horsemen strange in that the vocabulary is different for similar armor. I would be in favor of changing the terminology to either light-medium-heavy (I like this better) or light-heavy-armored (not so happy with this one) for both footmen and horsemen. I know that this may cause confusion later on, but it’s sort of strange as written. 2. I’m torn on shields in Attack/Defense ratings. I like your first one better (differentiating by leather vs chain vs plate) but it does seem odd that shields have no effect so I wouldn’t argue with allowing the shield to bump you up one rank as per your second suggestion. (Uncertain as to what to do with plate & shield). 3. As far as non-supernatural combat goes, I much prefer the “standard” system to the “man-to-man” table. For some reason, having to cross reference weapon type to armor type has always bugged me, perhaps due to the fact that I’ve often played OD&D in “every weapon does 1d6” mode where the weapon is only part of the flavor and not the system. The man-to-man table makes weapon choice suddenly important again. I put together a chart somewhere as to how I use the “standard” table and simplify it, so I’ll try to find it and then figure out how to post charts. 4. Your interpretation of the Fantasy Combat table matches mine. Again, awesome thread! You da man!  |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 26, 2009 8:07:58 GMT -6
Thanks, Fyn. Now if I could only find a group locally to test it out with...
As for the differentiation in cavalry vs. infantry, I expect it comes from two trains of thought:
1. Cavalry definitely have an advantage against infantry when the two clash, unless the latter is wielding pole arms.
2. It's harder to hit a rider on horseback than on foot--you could, if you wanted, add an intermediate area where the foot troop can attack a mounted troop as a foot, but success simply damages the horse. When the horse dies, of course, the rider becomes a footman.
3. Add to that the difference in movement, and well...
Though if you're just talking about the terminology difference, I think that just comes from the odd classifications used in archaic armies for infantry and cavalry.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Apr 26, 2009 8:21:18 GMT -6
Though if you're just talking about the terminology difference, I think that just comes from the odd classifications used in archaic armies for infantry and cavalry. Yup. Just the actual terminology used. Kind of like calling one short-medium-tall and the other small-medium-large. Just pick one to be lesser-middle-better and use that classification for both infantry and cavalry. For example, SPI's PRESTAGS wargame system classifies cavalry as LC, MC, HC (light cavalry, medium cavalry, heavy cavalry). We really don't need the term "armored" as long as we can assume that heavy is more armored than medium which is more armored again than light. Just me thinking out loud... |
|
jacar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 348
|
Post by jacar on Apr 26, 2009 12:15:13 GMT -6
Hi all,
Funny how threads like these pop up! Glad to see it!
First off, my take on chainmail was to provide 3 different systems to fight out Medieval and Fantasy combat. I don't think the intent was to intertwine the massed combat with the man-to-man combat. The MtM combat was intended to do skirmish gaming and castle assaults. My take anyway.
Regarding armor class, I think armor worn is only half the equation. Just because a man wears plate armor does not make him a great warrior. It does help him in defense though. The other part is the attack power. In the fantasy supplement, for instance, dwarves fight as heavy foot but when they receive damage, they fight as light foot. So, to classify a hero (4 men) you would have to take a look at his AC AND his weapons. His AC might be 6 which, by your fine chart, is a heavy footman. But, what if he were weak, or has only a javelin, maybe he only fights as a light infantryman. So, to me, you should add a chart to determine the offensive capability as well. This will determine how a Hero fights against mundane critters in the massed combat system.
I've just started working on a revamped version of chainmail to inflict on our gaming group. It covers some of the topics that you want to tackle including a cleaned up massed combat system, shooting system and fatigue system. I'll also do a section for fantasy including a way to integrate OD&D characters onto the battlefield. You can see what I've done in the previous thread (The New Guy thread) and hope to have it in a document format in a few weeks time.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 26, 2009 14:06:56 GMT -6
Hi all, Funny how threads like these pop up! Glad to see it! First off, my take on chainmail was to provide 3 different systems to fight out Medieval and Fantasy combat. I don't think the intent was to intertwine the massed combat with the man-to-man combat. The MtM combat was intended to do skirmish gaming and castle assaults. My take anyway. That was what I originally thought, but when you really dig into how it all goes together with OD&D, there's no other good way to interpret it. When I tried to do it all with the Man-to-Man, I ended up altering, adjusting and changing so much stuff (out of pure necessity) that I came up with a completely original game, which is what Spellcraft & Swordplay is. You might check it out and see what you think  . My breakdown above accounts for that--see where your choice of weapons alters your attack, and your choice of armor alters your defense. Might be interesting to see. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2009 16:36:26 GMT -6
Hello, there is a description of some of the Chainmail armor types and how they are compared to D&D on page 6 of Monsters and Treasures under the composition of force for Bandits.
Light Foot ( leather armor & shield), Short Bow (leather armor), Crossbow (leather armor), Light Horse (leather armor & shield), Medium Horse (chain & shield no horse barding).
This fits in with your first set of AC values.
In your example of a first level fighter (Lt Foot, man +1), attacking an Orc who defends as Heavy foot the Chainmail Combat Tables, list 1 die per 2 men, 6 kills.
You suggest the first option which is to allow one roll for the attacker. ( 5-6 = 1 Hit)
A second option would be to not allow an attack at all. (NA)
The third option would be to allow two rolls with both rolls needing to succeed in order for a single hit to be scored. (5-6 and 5-6 = 1 Hit).
The last option is the one I used so that in situations like this the Light Foot attacker does not have the same attack ability as a Heavy Foot.
For Chainmail Combat Table
1 die per 2 men and you have only 1 man then roll 2 die both need to succeed to inflict 1 Hit.
3 men per hit, you have 1 man = roll 3, 3 need to hit.
3 men per hit, you have 2 men = roll 3, 2 need to hit.
4 men per hit, you have 1 man = roll 4, 4 need to hit.
4 men per hit, you have 2 men = roll 4, 3 need to hit.
4 men per hit, you have 3 men = roll 4, 2 need to hit.
In Chainmail a Hero fights as 4 men unless he is fighting one of the types on the Fantasy Combat Table then he fights as a Hero.
If you have a Hero rated as Light Foot fighting a single Heavy Horse the Combat Tables of Chainmail gives you 1 die per four men 6 Kills. The Hero would get one roll, a 6 = 1 Hit.
D&D adds plus and minus to the abilities. So a 7th level a champion gets Superhero -1. You say he fights as 8 men (Hero x 2). I disagree, I think that what level the fighter is gives you the number of men that he fights as in normal combat, which would be 7 men. No big deal, but I also think that the -1 modifier on the Superhero does not apply to the 7 men part of his abilities.
A 7th level fighter (Light Foot) attacking a single Heavy Horse the Combat Tables of Chainmail gives you 1 die per four men 6 Kills. The Champion would get one roll, a 6 = 1 Hit. (using 4 of the 7 men ability)
He would also get one of the options listed above. ( the remaining 3 men of his ability) A second roll (6 = 1 additional Hit), no second roll since he has only part of the required 4 men (NA), or third he would roll four times needing two dice to succeed and score 1 additional Hit.
I think the -1 for the Superhero should only be used for the Chainmail Fantasy Combat Tbale. In Chainmail you get a plus or minus to attack die rolls in normal combat or the fantasy supplement in only two examples which I can think of (Hv Cav charging a flank, and Dark loving creatures fighting in daylight.).
Of course D&D changed that, but if you want an example of how Chainmail handles a bonus which does not over power the Combat Tables look at magical swords near the end of the Fantasy Supplement in Chainmail. They give an extra die on the Combat Tables, and a +1 on the on the Fantasy Combat Table where the 2D6 are used.
Well, I hope that this helps. I would also suggest using the morale rules from Chainmail, as this really clears out the rabble before the main event takes place.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 26, 2009 17:16:54 GMT -6
Good catch with the Bandit entry in M&M; it mostly as you pointed out confirms what I interpreted.
Your idea about multiple dice with all requiring hits, while intriguing, is far more extrapolation than is clear in the rules. The concept of dropping fractions is far more intuitive and in keeping with D&D's philosophy from the very beginning. Disallowing an attack in normal combat is distasteful, particularly since it results in a Level 1 character having no chance at all to kill a basic orc (which attacks and defends as Heavy Foot).
Also, how do you get 7 men for a Superhero? Given that a Hero = 4 men and a Superhero is expressly defined as twice as powerful as a Hero, it should be 8 men. Removing the penalties from ordinary combat makes leveling in D&D far less attractive and important, which is clearly against the intent of the authors.
I do agree about Chainmail's morale, which OD&D clearly intended would be used. The general tone of OD&D reads, "use Chainmail for all rules except those specifically altered herein."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2009 21:02:32 GMT -6
In Chainmail there is no explanation on what to do about the Combat Tables 1 die per x men if you do not have x men. So the multi dice on the partial was something I made up to fill in the gap between no attack possible and giving the attacker a free attack at a greater ability.
Your right about the Superhero being 8 men, it is more my opinion than written rule that a Superhero -1 is worth 7 men. I also think a Superhero +1 is worth 9 men. Of course this is just my opinion, and I see how I have added my own bias into extending this pattern into the higher levels as my own house rule.
I did not suggest removing penalties, I just think that using a minus from a 2D6 system in a D6 system may cause some issues.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 27, 2009 6:14:08 GMT -6
Re: Superheroes and bonus/penalties: okay, I thought that's what you were getting at but wasn't sure.
I considered using the penalties and bonuses as penalty or bonus dice, but that makes some levels functionally identical to others, even though on their face they're not. For example, a second level (2 Men + 1) fighting man becomes functionally equivalent to a third level (3 Men or Hero - 1). It also means a 4th level cleric fights just as well as a 4th level fighting man.
I think we just have different philosophical approaches to the problem.
|
|
jacar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 348
|
Post by jacar on Apr 27, 2009 9:33:40 GMT -6
Hi Guys,
So this gets back to my theory about the three different mechanics. There is a logical progression for fighting men in the ODnD book 1.
Lvl 1 = man
Lvl 2 = 2 men
Note that these guys have no "hero" equivalent. They cannot affect supernatural monsters.
Lvl 3 = 3 men or Hero -1
Lvl 4=Hero
Lvl 5=5 men or Hero+1
Lvl 6=6 men or Hero+1
Lvl 7=7men or Super Hero -1
Lvl 8=8men or Super Hero
I think the intent was always to have the number of HD = the number of fighting men. You then only have to guesstimate the fighting class for massed combat. The -1 +1 thing is for the Fantasy combat table or (possibly) the MtM table. In massed combat, you use the number of men equivalent. Is it an extrapolation? Absolutely! Does it work for every case? Again Absolutely!
It makes sense because a 1st level is clearly better somehow than a 2nd level. A 3rd level is clearly better than a 2nd level. and so forth...
John
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 27, 2009 13:00:31 GMT -6
Sure, John, but how exactly does that work, in your extrapolation?
For example, you I presume are saying individual combat should be on the MtM table and not using the xd6/man rules. So if a Lvl 2 character attacks as 2 men, does that mean that on the MtM table he attacks twice?
What, then, of creatures like orcs, who don't get a Man rating and are not listed on the combat table, but attack and defend as "Hvy Ft"? Does this mean that your third level character attacks the orc three times, but the orc only attacks him once?
|
|
jacar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 348
|
Post by jacar on Apr 27, 2009 15:03:25 GMT -6
Sure, John, but how exactly does that work, in your extrapolation? For example, you I presume are saying individual combat should be on the MtM table and not using the xd6/man rules. So if a Lvl 2 character attacks as 2 men, does that mean that on the MtM table he attacks twice? What, then, of creatures like orcs, who don't get a Man rating and are not listed on the combat table, but attack and defend as "Hvy Ft"? Does this mean that your third level character attacks the orc three times, but the orc only attacks him once? Good question and one I don't necessarily have an answer for! ;D This sort of problem is why i don't think that the MtM rules were meant to be compatible with the massed combat rules. But, as you've pointed out earlier, the OD&D game books seem to hint otherwise. If you forget the MtM rules and use only the massed combat rules for army battles then it works just fine. It's when you try to apply this stuff to the MtM rules, things fall apart. I am pretty certain that the fantasy stuff in the back of Chainmail was designed for the massed combat rules. If you are using the MtM rules, you are better off not mixing them with massed combat stuff. Without house rules to add something like level difference for a to-hit modifier, the MtM rules don't really even mesh with OD&D all that well. Besides, at this point, you might as well play the OD&D with the "alternate" combat system as it was meant for MtM combat. My take on that anyway. John |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Apr 27, 2009 17:05:58 GMT -6
What, then, of creatures like orcs, who don't get a Man rating and are not listed on the combat table, but attack and defend as "Hvy Ft"? Does this mean that your third level character attacks the orc three times, but the orc only attacks him once? That's my interpretation, yes.  |
|
jacar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 348
|
Post by jacar on Apr 27, 2009 20:15:12 GMT -6
thegreyelf,
You asked how it all combines...here is your answer from "Men and Magic" Page 18 last entry titled "Fighting Capability." The paragraph reads as follows:
"This is a key to use in conjunction with the CHAINMAIL fantasy rule, as modified in various places herein. An alternative system will be given later for those who prefer a different method."
Note that it only mentioned the fantasy portion of Chainmail. Now, if you look at the fantasy rules in Chainmail, they appear to be extensions of the Massed Combat rules. The terms given are only terms used in the massed combat game when it comes to normal combat. When they talk about fantasy combat, the rules are contained within the fantasy section. Never in the fantasy section do they mention anything about specific mundane weapons as they pertain to the MtM rules. They only ever talk in terms of classes of troops as they pertain to the MC rules.
Now, I suspect that the MtM rules were the beginnings of the ODnD alternate combat system that we know and love today.
That's pretty much how I view it. YMMV of course!
John
|
|
jacar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 348
|
Post by jacar on Apr 27, 2009 20:53:13 GMT -6
After reading book 3, in the back there seems to be some interesting bits on how combat works. Here they mention that land combat is, in fact, based on either the tables in book 1 OR the chainmail book. I suspect the do mean the MtM tables because they state "a drive back or kill result = 1 hit." Then you do hit points of damage. The combat ability is probably what Finarvyn and others have said. If you are a Hero, you get 4 whacks at the enemy potentially causing 4 hits. That would be a D6 per hit. You would be a whirling death machine at that level! You would get attacks = to your level under this system. The Hero thing pertains to the fantasy rules which is besically MC rules. I'd leave the +1/-1 things to that portion of the game. John |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2009 4:12:51 GMT -6
jacar, the "drive back or kill + 1 Hit" refers to the Fantasy Combat Table in Appendix E, which is part of the mass combat fantasy rules. The man to man rules on pages 25-27 of Chainmail were not written for any type of fantasy combat and that includes the man to man melee table appendix B, individual fires with missiles table, and the jousting table appendix C.
later parts of these man to man tables were added to the alternate combat system in Greyhawk supplement I, pg 13-14.
The only place the man to man rules are mentioned in th Fantasy supplement in Chainmail is under Magic Armor, where it mentions that magic armor subtracts 1 from the opponents die roll on the fantasy combat table , and three from the man to man table. However this does not mean that those rules should be included with the mass combat rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 28, 2009 6:07:27 GMT -6
Correct. My reading is that 90% of the time, you're meant to use the mass-combat rules (ie. attack type vs. defense type gives you # of d6's rolled and results for hits) even though you're dealing with man-on-man situations. It is, however, entirely workable to use the man-to-man system in D&D when dealing with "mundane" fantastic opponents such as orcs, goblins, et. al, simply by divining what kind of armor they're wearing and weapons they're using. If you want to use the next evolution of the game to extrapolate, you can even grant multiple attacks based on hit dice to monsters, assuming they attack as Fighting Men.
|
|
jacar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 348
|
Post by jacar on Apr 28, 2009 7:27:52 GMT -6
Great stuff guys!
Rabbit, I'll have a look at my Greyhawk Supplement tonight.
thegreyelf, the big problem I have with the MtM rules is specifically the combat tables. The numbers seem too low for multiple dice per attack. Adding the rules that equaling the number drives the enemy back would help balance the table some. It would be better to raise the numbers and possibly analyze each weapon given bonuses vs armor or something. I very much like the idea that all weapons cause the same damage (plus strength) but some weapons hit better vs different kinds of armor.
I think ADnD did too much by having variable damage AND armor mods. The variable damage was also broken in that you have no reason to take say a shortsword when you could swing a longsword and do more damage.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 28, 2009 8:38:24 GMT -6
I think you're confusing the M2M rules with the mass combat rules, jacar. There's no "multiple dice per attack" in the M2M rules. You just roll 2d6, cross-referencing your weapon vs. your opponent's armor. That's it.
The M2M rules don't use the regular "Hvy Ft vs. Lt Ft", etc., combat tables. At all.
|
|
jacar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 348
|
Post by jacar on Apr 28, 2009 8:42:02 GMT -6
I think you're confusing the M2M rules with the mass combat rules, jacar. There's no "multiple dice per attack" in the M2M rules. You just roll 2d6, cross-referencing your weapon vs. your opponent's armor. That's it. The M2M rules don't use the regular "Hvy Ft vs. Lt Ft", etc., combat tables. At all. This is true for MtM as a historical game. If you are adding the Fantasy elements (level=number of attacks) then you roll multiple times. Otherwise, how could a 8th level warrior be better in combat than a 1st level warrior? |
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Apr 28, 2009 8:58:57 GMT -6
Yes, but that's still not multiple dice per attack. It's simply multiple attacks, each at 2d6.
If you need a 12 to hit, 8 attacks gives you more chances at that 12, but doesn't guarantee a hit. Conversely, if you only need (for instance) a 7 to hit, you could hit more often, or more opponents.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 28, 2009 9:01:32 GMT -6
I've just made a modification to the original posts--in the standard rules, archers do NOT fire based solely on their "Man" rating, but based on the rate of fire of their weapon and their Man rating, cross-referencing the table on p. 11 of Chainmail.
[EDIT]coffee is correct. Also, to clarify: Level != number of attacks. You get attacks BASED on your level, but it's not always a 1:1 ratio.
|
|
jacar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 348
|
Post by jacar on Apr 28, 2009 9:24:28 GMT -6
For fighting men, it is basically the level. For others (Wizards, Clerics) it is whatever the table says it is. Pretty much what I surmised based on re-reading the rules and what others have said here.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Apr 28, 2009 9:49:01 GMT -6
Yes and no. At first and second levels it's level+1. Third through 6th level is straight level. Seventh through 10th drops the "Man" rating altogether and just lists Superhero +/-...which makes a difference in how various things are handled.
|
|
jacar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 348
|
Post by jacar on Apr 28, 2009 10:05:02 GMT -6
The +1 is likely a massed combat morale/fight bonus that heroes get when stacked with a unit. Note that it is dropped when you see 3 men OR hero -1. The -1 there is probably a -1 to the fantastic combat chart. The +1 for 1st and second level is likely spelled out because they are not heroes bt convey the morale/fight bonus for units they lead. It's really maddening the way Gygax/Arneson wrote the rules. You have to infer a good bit. As always, YMMV. However, that explanation makes sense from front to back in massed combat. Less so in MtM combat.
I have no doubt what they wrote made sense to them in the context of their minds. The problem lies in figuring out what that context was! They use terms that work for them but make no notes as to what they refer to. you have to read all relevant parts and figure it all out from the big picture. Sometimes these parts are scattered throughout 4 books!
So getting back on track, with keeping what i said in mind, yes, fighting men are in fact 1HD is 1 attack. The +1/-1 is used for fantastic combat if the character has hero status. The +1 is used for morale and combat to hit bonus if the character is not a hero (ie 1st or 2nd level).
John
John
|
|
.
