The Faq does contain a less than 1 HD rule I handn't noticed before and maybe more interestingly, neither the 3lbb's nor the FAQ seems to indactate that multiple attacks are exclusive to the fighter. Like to know what yuins think.
If the FAQ "does contain a less than 1 HD rule", I can't see it. In fact, the example given details 1 HD Orcs versus a 4 HD fighter. Neither of these are less than 1 HD.
But, insomuch as you do ask for our thoughts...
I couldn't help but notice that you've misspelled my monicker in your blog post
But my main quibble with your essay is the (I believe) unjustified weight you ascribe to the phrase "fantastic combat" where it appears in the FAQ.
Yes, that term has meaning in the context of Chainmail. Chainmail began as an historical war game. Later, when the fantasy supplement was added, it became necessary to distinguish between ordinary and fantastical combat.
D&D was never historical; it was always fantasy. So no such distinction is necessary. D&D combat is fantastic combat.
That aside, the FAQ itself begins by recommending that Chainmail not be used for D&D. The remainder of the article, dedicated to answering FAQs about D&D, would hardly then be answered in the context of Chainmail. That would directly contradict the author's own freshly minted recommendation.
In my view, the statement "When fantastic combat is taking place..." in the FAQ simply means "When D&D combat is taking place...".
While Chainmail was initially historical, D&D was always rooted in fantasy.
D&D is purely fantasy.
D&D combat is "fantastic combat".
That's how I read it, and I suspect also how the vast majority of readers (not being Chainmail buffs) would read it.
The Faq does contain a less than 1 HD rule I handn't noticed before and maybe more interestingly, neither the 3lbb's nor the FAQ seems to indactate that multiple attacks are exclusive to the fighter. Like to know what yuins think.
I was going to ask the very same question regarding other classes last week, but never got around to it. The examples are with a superhero and a hero, but it never specifies that the rule only applies to a fighting men. I wasn't sure if it was specified somewhere else, though.
If the FAQ "does contain a less than 1 HD rule", I can't see it. In fact, the example given details 1 HD Orcs versus a 4 HD fighter. Neither of these are less than 1 HD.
He's referring to this line from the FAQ: Assume the following dice score by the Hero. Note that he is allowed one attack for each of his combat levels as the ratio of one Orc vs. the Hero is 1:4, so this is treated as normal (non-fantastic) melee, as is any combat where the score of one side is a base 1 hit die or less.
I'm having trouble parsing the construction of that sentence, but perhaps you can take a whirl, ways.
"Story tellers are always careful to point out that the reputed dungeons lie in close proximity to the foundations of an older, pre-human city, to the graveyard, and to the sea.” - Holmes rulebook
Zenopus Archives - Holmes Basic D&D - website & blog
He's referring to this line from the FAQ: Assume the following dice score by the Hero. Note that he is allowed one attack for each of his combat levels as the ratio of one Orc vs. the Hero is 1:4, so this is treated as normal (non-fantastic) melee, as is any combat where the score of one side is a base 1 hit die or less.
I'm having trouble parsing the construction of that sentence, but perhaps you can take a whirl, ways.
You are absolutely correct, Zenopus! Thanks for pointing that out -- I will have to get my eyes checked.
As to the literal meaning of that phrase, that may require some further thought
But my main quibble with your essay is the (I believe) unjustified weight you ascribe to the phrase "fantastic combat" where it appears in the FAQ.
Yes, that term has meaning in the context of Chainmail. Chainmail began as an historical war game. Later, when the fantasy supplement was added, it became necessary to distinguish between ordinary and fantastical combat.
D&D was never historical; it was always fantasy. So no such distinction is necessary. D&D combat is fantastic combat.
That aside, the FAQ itself begins by recommending that Chainmail not be used for D&D. The remainder of the article, dedicated to answering FAQs about D&D, would hardly then be answered in the context of Chainmail. That would directly contradict the author's own freshly minted recommendation.
In my view, the statement "When fantastic combat is taking place..." in the FAQ simply means "When D&D combat is taking place...".
While Chainmail was initially historical, D&D was always rooted in fantasy.
D&D is purely fantasy.
D&D combat is "fantastic combat".
So, what then do we make of the distinction Gygax makes in the "D&D" FAQ when he makes the remark that the encounter described between the hero and the orc is expressly "non-fantastic"? Gygax states: "this is treated as normal (non-fantastic) melee, as is any combat where the score of one side is a base 1 hit die or less." It seems clear that the distinction lies at the 1-HD threshold, and it therefore seems to suggest that multiple attacks are gained when "fantastic" characters (i.e., characters of more than one HD) engage in combat with "normal (non-fantastic)" characters.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 12:44pm by Kris Kobold »
Joined: Sept 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 1,217 Location: Melbourne, Australia Karma: 195
Re: How Many Hits Does It Take? « Reply #50 on May 17, 2012, 9:41am »
You're right on Kris Kobold, I can't wriggle out of that one. Gygax clearly slips parenthetically back into Chainmail speak there.
The moral of the story; don't reply without checking the source material again
But I still can't make sense of the first reference to "fantastic combat" in the Chainmail context, because the phrase implies the exact reverse of what I'd expect.
The first phrase says: "When fantastic combat is taking place there is normally only one exchange of attacks per round". I.e., in combat there is normally one attack per round. If it did involve fantastic figures, and special rules for them, then surely there would be something other than the standard one attack per round?
You're right on Kris Kobold, I can't wriggle out of that one. Gygax clearly slips parenthetically back into Chainmail speak there.
The moral of the story; don't reply without checking the source material again
But I still can't make sense of the first reference to "fantastic combat" in the Chainmail context, because the phrase implies the exact reverse of what I'd expect.
The first phrase says: "When fantastic combat is taking place there is normally only one exchange of attacks per round". I.e., in combat there is normally one attack per round. If it did involve fantastic figures, and special rules for them, then surely there would be something other than the standard one attack per round?
Well keep in mind that Gygax had been playing CHAINMAIL for 2 or three years longer than D&D, and that he was the author of it. He is the one who made the distinction between normal and fantastic combat in CM in the first place, and there's no reason to think he was confusing his own terms or that all D&D combat is fantastic by default.
In fantastic combat - wheter it is in D&D or CM - there's normally one attack per round. (some creatures might get two or three if they have special attacks - but that's not the usual by definition)
But "normal" combat in either D&D or CM can have multiple attacks as is demonstrated by the reference to the troll who attacks a normal man. If that troll were attacking another troll, there would only be one attack each, in either game.
I haven't tried to find all the references to "normal" and "fantastic" combat Gygax makes in other places but it's very clear he is making that distinction in both D&D and CM.
... and there's no reason to think he was confusing his own terms or that all D&D combat is fantastic by default.
Actually, there is. When Gygax wrote his Lejendary FRPG he consciously avoided using any terms from D&D. His reasoning was that different nomenclature would help get players into the mindset this was a different game. Yet, while running Lejendary Adventures, he constantly slipped up and used the D&D equivalent term instead of the Lejendary one.
So, while this anecdote is by no means a conclusive contradiction? It certainly shows that, author or not, he could still get a bit mixed up at times.
He's referring to this line from the FAQ: Assume the following dice score by the Hero. Note that he is allowed one attack for each of his combat levels as the ratio of one Orc vs. the Hero is 1:4, so this is treated as normal (non-fantastic) melee, as is any combat where the score of one side is a base 1 hit die or less.
I'm having trouble parsing the construction of that sentence, but perhaps you can take a whirl, ways.
Yeah that's why I wrote "His use of “ratio” and “base” suggest you are supposed to create a fraction and reduce to determine whether fantastic combat is taking place. Upon reflection, I don’t think that’s what he actually meant." on the blog.
It gives me a headache trying to figure that one out, but I think Gygax is a victim of his own vocabulary here, using words that clouded an intended simple meaning, something like "the orcs have but one HD to the Hero's 4 so its normal (non-fantastic) as is any combat with 1HD or less".
If that isn't what he meant then you are looking at creating fractions with HD and reducing.
... and there's no reason to think he was confusing his own terms or that all D&D combat is fantastic by default.
Actually, there is. When Gygax wrote his Lejendary FRPG he consciously avoided using any terms from D&D. His reasoning was that different nomenclature would help get players into the mindset this was a different game. Yet, while running Lejendary Adventures, he constantly slipped up and used the D&D equivalent term instead of the Lejendary one.
So, while this anecdote is by no means a conclusive contradiction? It certainly shows that, author or not, he could still get a bit mixed up at times.
But we are not talking about offhand remarks here. The FAQ is an article in print and was no doubt reviewed a time or two before being typeset. The terms are also used consistently throughout the piece and in other places.
But we are not talking about offhand remarks here. The FAQ is an article in print and was no doubt reviewed a time or two before being typeset. The terms are also used consistently throughout the piece and in other places.
I'm willing to concede that is possible. I would point out, however, reading the SR indicates to me the review and editing process was rushed. It is also possible the article was merely checked for typos and printed "as is".
... and there's no reason to think he was confusing his own terms or that all D&D combat is fantastic by default.
Actually, there is. When Gygax wrote his Lejendary FRPG he consciously avoided using any terms from D&D. His reasoning was that different nomenclature would help get players into the mindset this was a different game. Yet, while running Lejendary Adventures, he constantly slipped up and used the D&D equivalent term instead of the Lejendary one.
So, while this anecdote is by no means a conclusive contradiction? It certainly shows that, author or not, he could still get a bit mixed up at times.
I was under the impression that the terminology used in LA was created in order to distance the property from D&D and its current copyright owners for legal reasons.
In fantastic combat - wheter it is in D&D or CM - there's normally one attack per round. (some creatures might get two or three if they have special attacks - but that's not the usual by definition)
But "normal" combat in either D&D or CM can have multiple attacks as is demonstrated by the reference to the troll who attacks a normal man. If that troll were attacking another troll, there would only be one attack each, in either game.
I still get the impression that people may be reading more precision into the vocabulary used in the rules (and FAQ,) BUT... the distinction between fantastic combat normally being only one attack per round and other combat involving multiple attacks on normal men almost leads me to think that "fantastic combat" means any combat where both sides would normally get multiple attacks -- troll vs. hero is "fantastic" (one attack each,) troll vs. mercenaries is non-fantastic (troll gets multiple attacks.) Non-fantastic combat is anything you don't want to (or need to) focus on.
A mild supporting factoid is a comment Mike Mornard has made about how Gygax handled combats against orcs and the like: he rolled a single die (d4 for heroes, d6 for level 6 types, d8 for superheroes, etc.) and said "that's how many orcs you killed." Not written anywhere in the rules, but it seems like a reasonable house rule to blow through the uninteresting parts of combat and focus on the more important stuff.
I was under the impression that the terminology used in LA was created in order to distance the property from D&D and its current copyright owners for legal reasons.
That's possible, too; but what I posted above is what he told me when I asked about why he didn't just use terms most gamers already knew.
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author
![[avatar]](http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss56/waysoftheearth/Ways_100x100.jpg "[avatar]")
Logged
![[avatar]](http://i51.tinypic.com/34oeau1.jpg "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
![[avatar]](http://www.jastabinksaviation.com/6614pf.JPG "[avatar]")
Darn it anyhow. Sorry about that Simon. Will fix pronto.
![[avatar]](http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z17/tmpiper/90x90.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v485/Verhaden/sa_avatar.jpg "[avatar]"){kind=avatar}