Hmm, I don't know if it really is that vague. Let's have a look, shall we? .... Enjoy
Thanks for putting that together, Ways. Do you have a digitized copy of the rules that you can search? You're quite adept at finding all of the references in the text to a given term or topic.
There are more rules about morale in the 3BB's than I realized. When I said the rules seem vague at best, I was actually thinking of two questions which they don't seem to answer (at least, if one is expecting the answer to come in a certain form). The first question is: When should the referee check for monster or NPC morale? The answer I was expecting was something along the lines of "when one third of the monster's party has been captured or killed," or "when the monster is reduced to 50% or less of its total hit points," or in any event something with a degree of precision that we get from Chainmail about when to check for morale. As you show, Men and Magic does talk about when to check the morale of an NPC henchmen in the employ of a PC, but this does not seem to be meant to cover all cases in which morale can and should be checked. Also, you point out the subdual rules, but I think these are meant to apply to dragons specifically, and not to all of the NPCs or monsters which may take part in combat.
The second question I wanted an answer to was: How do the morale rolls of tougher monsters or NPCs compare with the morale rolls of weaker monsters or NPCs? In seeking an answer to this question, I was assuming that some creatures should have better chances at making a morale check than others, and for reasons other than their treatment by a PC employer. I would imagine that a kobold should have a lower chance to make a morale check than a balrog, all else being equal. But the rules don't seem to directly support that. You do a great job of showing all of the instances in the rules regarding monsters which receive a bonus to morale, or a penalty to morale, or regarding monsters which need not check morale. It's not clear to me this is meant to be a complete set of rules or guidelines for morale, though. Kobolds and goblins receive a -1 penalty to morale in full daylight, but other than that they have the same morale as balrogs, hydras, you name it; hobgoblins receive a +1 morale bonus, but vampires, wights, etc. do not.
On the other hand, maybe that's all the rules there were intended to be for morale in OD&D. Monsters either never check morale, or they have similar chances when a morale check is called for, apart from a small bonus or penalty every now and again (the gnoll appears to be the rare exception with a +2 morale bonus). I think my expectations for what a D&D morale rule is supposed to look like were conditioned by Gygax's AD&D 1st edition rule, and by the Moldvay Basic D&D rule. I suppose I can live without much differentiation between adjustments to morale dice for monster type, but I would like more specific guidance about when to check for morale for monsters and NPCs not in a PCs employ.
Anyway, thanks again for your thoughtful and content-rich post.
My reading of that is that EGG is cautioning the reader not to overlook the use of morale, rather than his downplaying its importance.
I think that the sentence is ambiguous and can be read in the way you suggest. The reason why I don't read it that way is because the context of the sentence seems to suggest otherwise:
Quote:
Morale: This is a factor which is seldom considered. The players, basically representing only their character and a few others, have their own personal morale in reality. Unintelligent monsters fight until death. Occasionally, however, it is necessary to check either troops serving with a party (in whatever respect) or the morale of intelligent monsters. [The Strategic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 3-4]]
Gygax's second sentence in the quotation above explains why it is not necessary to check morale for PCs and "a few others" (presumably their henchmen); his third sentence explains that unintelligent monsters fight until death and thus never check morale. This implies that in many D&D combats, morale does not need to be checked, which favors interpreting "morale is seldom considered" in the way I suggested.
* Consult the following (re-worded, combat-centric) reaction table to interpret the result: ....2d6........Morale ...Score......Reaction --------------------------------- .2.or.less....Surrender,.subdued, captured ....3-5.......Back.off, withdraw, flee ....6-8.......Uncertain,.hold.the.line ....9-11......Press.the.advantage.strategically 12.or.more....Charge.impetuously!
I forgot to comment on this table. It's actually a very helpful re-working of the reaction table for the purpose of a morale check.
I would be tempted to interpret a result of 2 as immediate surrender, a result of 3-5 as a rout or disorderly retreat (which enables attacks from the rear by opponents in melee with routing combatants), and a result of 6-8 as an orderly retreat (what is called a "fighting withdrawal" in David Cook's Expert D&D book and in his AD&D 2nd edition books), which doesn't allow attacks from the rear by opponents in melee.
Thanks for putting that together, Ways. Do you have a digitized copy of the rules that you can search?
Thank you for giving me a reason to investigate morale
Yes, I have scanned my 1st and 6th prints for exactly that purpose. One day (if I ever get them) I'm hoping to be able compare each print exactingly via the same method.
The first question is: When should the referee check for monster or NPC morale? ... but this does not seem to be meant to cover all cases in which morale can and should be checked. ... Also, you point out the subdual rules, but I think these are meant to apply to dragons specifically
The 3LBBs are rarely exhaustive, instead giving a few example from which the referee can extrapolate to other cases. Morale is no different in this regard.
Concerning subdual, I am convinced that the subdual rules are generally applicable. Sure, there is a detailed section on "Subduing Dragons" in volume 2, which begins by stating:
Quote:
Any attack may be to subdue rather than to kill, but this intent must be announced before melee begins.
Note that it clearly states that ANY attack may be to subdue?
Volume 1 also states:
Quote:
Subdued monsters will obey for a time without need to check their reactions, and such monsters are salable.
Again, telling us that monsters in general, not just dragons, can be subdued.
Other monster descriptions in M&T mention subdual, too. E.g., Lycanthrope young are automatically subdued if the parents are slain. Balrogs cannot be subdued (also addressing part of your next question). And so on.
The second question I wanted an answer to was: How do the morale rolls of tougher monsters or NPCs compare with the morale rolls of weaker monsters or NPCs?
Morale varies, monster to monster, by the "loyalty adjustment", which is typically +2 to -2, or in some cases meaning morale checks are never taken. I believe this sets a precedent encouraging the referee to adjust monster morale within this range, more or less at his whim.
If the referee is so inclined, he can rule that Kobolds (and perhaps all monsters with less than 1 HD?) have a -2 morale adjustment compared to Men.
If the referee desires that tougher monsters have higher morale (as you imply above), he might rule that monsters in general adjust morale by +1 for every 4 HD, or something to that effect. It is all perfectly within the referee's rights and responsibilities to make the game his own.
Regarding some of the monsters you specifically named; vampire and wights and so on are never hurt by mundane weaponry, and thus are never required to take a morale check under mundane attacks. Meanwhile, Kobolds (occurring in their hundreds) might be routed by a single stone throw.
Balrogs cannot be subdued, and therefore by implication need not take morale tests.
This implies that in many D&D combats, morale does not need to be checked, which favors interpreting "morale is seldom considered" in the way I suggested.
Well put. Thank you for the cogent, rational analysis. Good gaming!
ETA: And, have an exalt for being such a gentleman!
Well put. Thank you for the cogent, rational analysis. Good gaming!
ETA: And, have an exalt for being such a gentleman!
Hey, thanks, and no problem. I figure we can accomplish a lot more here if we're civil. In any event, I look forward to learning more from reading these boards.
* Consult the following (re-worded, combat-centric) reaction table to interpret the result: ....2d6........Morale ...Score......Reaction --------------------------------- .2.or.less....Surrender,.subdued, captured ....3-5.......Back.off, withdraw, flee ....6-8.......Uncertain,.hold.the.line ....9-11......Press.the.advantage.strategically 12.or.more....Charge.impetuously!
I forgot to comment on this table. It's actually a very helpful re-working of the reaction table for the purpose of a morale check.
Another thing to consider is that the Turn Undead ability is actually a morale check for undead. Undead do not otherwise check morale, but the commanding presence of cleric causes them to check morale at 2d6 + 2 x (cleric level - monster HD). An adjusted reaction of Good or better (9+) means the undead creatures flee the cleric's presence. This is sort of the inverse of the table WotE provides, since troop morale is usually expressed in terms of the troop's reaction to the master's orders.
Another thing to consider is the command control rules in the ship-board mêlée section of U&WA. When the leader issues an order in the middle of the chaos of combat, there's a chance that the troops won't obey the order immediately; it may take them a while to become aware of the order and react to it. This roll is a 1d6 roll.
I use that in combination with the 9+ ond 2d6 rule, adjusting this to 5+ on 1d6 and adding morale modifiers to the target number instead of the roll, so that I can use damage rolls directly as some of my morale rolls and simplify the number of dice I roll. In other words, if you do 5 or more points of damage to a bandit during an ambush, some of the bandits have lost morale and will retreat. If damage is adjusted, a 7+ means pure panic. Since I have Chainmail, but don't play it and haven't studied it thoroughly, I use morale checks in a couple situations that approximate the conditions listed in Chainmail without adhering to any strict rules:
When first encountering a superior force (separate roll;) On first injury (use damage roll;) When leader is first injured (use damage roll;) When losing half their force to casualties (use the last damage rolled;) Again at 2/3 casualties; When leader is killed (use damage roll;) When confronted with something feared, or when there is a sudden shift of power ("We didn't know they had a REAL WIZARD!")
I alter the results of morale failure based on the nature of the creature and the desires of the leader; morale failure means the creature does what comes naturally, while morale success means the creature obeys the last order they remember their leader giving. So, I actually *do* roll morale for berserkers who are told to "hold the line" or merely strike to subdue; morale failure means they push forward to slaughter the enemy mercilessly, and the extreme failure means s foolhardy charge.
Different situations can trigger different effects. For example, a goblin shieldwall may flee when they take half casualties, or they may break ranks and charge when they deal half casualties to the enemy. Plus, creatures that are listed as "never check morale" may have to check morale in situations other than battle; it depends on how I interpret the reason behind the creature's fearlessness, sort of like the situation with the undead.
I agree, Gronan, morale is important for OD&D--or at least, it ought to be. It's surprising to me that Gygax downplayed morale in the FAQ: "This is a factor which is seldom considered" (TSR, Vol. 1, No. 2, p. 3). The 2d6 method which Gygax proposes is vague at best. On the other hand, Chainmail's relatively complex rules for morale do seem somewhat out of place for OD&D. I prefer something along the lines of Gygax's 2d6 rule, but with a little more guidance about when to check morale and about what number different types of troops or monsters need to roll in order to pass the morale check.
1) Like others, I read "is seldom considered" to mean "people forget about it."
2) We just used the "Morale due to excess casualties" from CHAINMAIL and ignored the "Post Melee Morale" every turn. So Orcs were like heavy foot, check at 1/3 casualties and need 8 or 9 (I forget which) to hold, Kobolds are light foot, check at whatever casualties light foot check at, etc.
EDIT: 3) "Unintelligent" monsters did not check morale, but while an Ochre Jelly would fight to the death, a semi-intelligent giant lizard -- or anything with "animal level intelligence" -- might break off combat if it was badly hurt.
Michael Mornard -------------------------- Played in the original Blackmoor, Greyhawk, and EPT Campaigns "Gronan of Simmerya" aka "Old Geezer" aka "LORD Grumpy"
When should the referee check for monster or NPC morale? The answer I was expecting was something along the lines of "when one third of the monster's party has been captured or killed," or "when the monster is reduced to 50% or less of its total hit points," or in any event something with a degree of precision that we get from Chainmail about when to check for morale.
The second question I wanted an answer to was: How do the morale rolls of tougher monsters or NPCs compare with the morale rolls of weaker monsters or NPCs?
1) The assumption was that the CHAINMAIL table for excess casualties would be used in addition to the CHAINMAIL Fantasy Section rules where various fantasy critters are given human equivalents -- i.e. Kobolds are light foot, Orcs are heavy foot, etc.
Michael Mornard -------------------------- Played in the original Blackmoor, Greyhawk, and EPT Campaigns "Gronan of Simmerya" aka "Old Geezer" aka "LORD Grumpy"
1) Like others, I read "is seldom considered" to mean "people forget about it."
2) We just used the "Morale due to excess casualties" from CHAINMAIL and ignored the "Post Melee Morale" every turn. So Orcs were like heavy foot, check at 1/3 casualties and need 8 or 9 (I forget which) to hold, Kobolds are light foot, check at whatever casualties light foot check at, etc.
EDIT: 3) "Unintelligent" monsters did not check morale, but while an Ochre Jelly would fight to the death, a semi-intelligent giant lizard -- or anything with "animal level intelligence" -- might break off combat if it was badly hurt.
Hello, Mike, and thank-you for your answers. It's always of great interest to hear how about how the game was originally played. It does seem like using the instability due to excess casualties rule would be sufficient for morale in D&D, except that then you have to decide what troop type intelligent monsters count as (EDIT: I mean, the intelligent monsters not already covered in Chainmail).
Hello, Mike, and thank-you for your answers. It's always of great interest to hear how about how the game was originally played. It does seem like using the instability due to excess casualties rule would be sufficient for morale in D&D, except that then you have to decide what troop type intelligent monsters count as (EDIT: I mean, the intelligent monsters not already covered in Chainmail).
You're welcome.
As far as major PC-type monsters -- Balrogs, dragons, etc, that were intelligent -- I evaluated things like the monster was my PC. "Crap, I'm below half hit points (or 1/3 hit points) and I haven't killed a single one of these clowns. Time to beat cheeks!" When I'm a player, there's a point at which I'll try to cut my losses and get away, and that point is subjective. I just play monsters the same way.
Michael Mornard -------------------------- Played in the original Blackmoor, Greyhawk, and EPT Campaigns "Gronan of Simmerya" aka "Old Geezer" aka "LORD Grumpy"
* Consult the following (re-worded, combat-centric) reaction table to interpret the result: ....2d6........Morale ...Score......Reaction --------------------------------- .2.or.less....Surrender,.subdued, captured ....3-5.......Back.off, withdraw, flee ....6-8.......Uncertain,.hold.the.line ....9-11......Press.the.advantage.strategically 12.or.more....Charge.impetuously!
Nevertheless, I think the vagueness JM alludes to is a very real issue for many readers, precisely because of the lack of a table like the one you created above. Not having it spelled out that or some similar way has led to many ignoring Morale entirely.
That's for sure. I've been trying to run the game recently, and the rules are sorely missing a table like this. I get it now! Thanks to all who helped explain morale in this thread.
2) We just used the "Morale due to excess casualties" from CHAINMAIL and ignored the "Post Melee Morale" every turn. So Orcs were like heavy foot, check at 1/3 casualties and need 8 or 9 (I forget which) to hold, Kobolds are light foot, check at whatever casualties light foot check at, etc.
Seems like this simple idea (2d6 vs. a target number) is the basis of the morale rules in B/X > BECMI > RC, albeit in reverse, no?
Michael Mornard -------------------------- Played in the original Blackmoor, Greyhawk, and EPT Campaigns "Gronan of Simmerya" aka "Old Geezer" aka "LORD Grumpy"
Joined: Jul 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 561 Karma: 17
Re: Rules from Chainmail Required for OD&D Play « Reply #29 on Sept 1, 2012, 9:12am »
To me, it's no surprise that loyalty is a 3d6 roll. I treat it as the "7th stat". It does so much to help define an NPC. Combined with a morale score it is simple to construct an idea of who this NPC henchman is. (high loyalty and low morale in a fight?, low loyalty, but fearless in combat? etc).
For monsters, I like the idea that a dragon or vampire might have a morale of 2...and therefore wish to parlay at the first sign of danger. A dragon that wimpers and crys after the first blow is struck. Likewise a group of fanatical kobolds must be guarding something or someoneone important if I randomly roll a 12 morale! The random allocation of morale is great for getting the DM's ideas flowing in directions he might not have.
![[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://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/45_St_George_on_Horseback.jpg "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
Logged
![[avatar]](http://i561.photobucket.com/albums/ss56/waysoftheearth/Ways_100x100.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z17/tmpiper/90x90.jpg "[avatar]")
