Monsters get multiple attacks against Normal Men?

[simrion]

Wow I missed this. Don't know if it's been discussed but while perusing my copy of M & T I noticed the section just past the list of Monster stats stating

Attack/Defense capabilities versus normal men are simply a matter of allowing one roll as a man-type for every hit die, with any bonuses being given to only one of the attacks, i.e. a Troll would attack six times, once with a +3 added to the die roll.

Can I assume this is a carry over from Chainmail? Obviously further carried over to AD&D for Fighter types but not for the monsters...subsumed I guess by the later occurrence of multiple monster attacks?

[makofan]

Delving Deeper incorporates this by giving a troll 6 attacks against normal men (anybody below 3 hit dice, including gnolls, elves, hobgoblins, level 2 clerics, etc), but only doing 1d6 damage and using the Monster HD 1 table (basically,m needing a 10 to hit AC 9)

My party got into a fight with a 4th level fighter, who got four attacks per round against them. Very dangerous.

[waysoftheearth]

Feb 26, 2015 9:55:11 GMT -6 simrion said:

Attack/Defense capabilities versus normal men are simply a matter of allowing one roll as a man-type for every hit die, with any bonuses being given to only one of the attacks, i.e. a Troll would attack six times, once with a +3 added to the die roll.

Can I assume this is a carry over from Chainmail? Obviously further carried over to AD&D for Fighter types but not for the monsters...subsumed I guess by the later occurrence of multiple monster attacks?

In 1973/74 OD&D, yes, the basic combat mechanics are from Chainmail, and the "Alternative" attack matrices you see in M&M are alternatives to the Man-to-Man and Fantasy Combat attack matrices in Chainmail. In particular, the distinction between normal and fantastic/heroic types, and the dichotomy between normal and fantastic combat is from Chainmail. As time went by the rules matured until we had AD&D instead, so if you want to include all the D&D rules up to 1977, it might not be so clear cut.

Notice also that the last part of the quoted rule implies that 1+1 HD types attack at +1 vs normal types too. I.e., veterans, elves, hobgoblins and the like would add one to their hit probability vs normal types

[simrion]

Must have made for devastating encounters if a Party had a mob of Normal Men with them (torch bearers, porters and assorted cannon fodder.) Run into a multiple HD baddie and let him get loose among the commoners = bloodbath!

[waysoftheearth]

Bear in mind the M&T rule says the monster attacks N many times as a man-type. So the monster's multiple attacks each retain the hit probability and damage of a normal man (i.e., unless the monster's first attack is at +X due to its HD, each attack requires a throw of 17+ to hit AC 2 and deals 1-6 hp damage on a hit). It's a serious threat to normals, sure, but it's not off the charts.

Fast forward to Summer 1975 and the FAQ article appears in SR 1.2, wherein EGG now states that a hero should have four attacks as a 4th level fighter versus normals. This is effectively "double dipping"; the hero combines his advantage in normal combat (multiple attacks) with his advantage in fantastic combat (improved hit probability) breaking the "clean" dichotomy between normal and fantastic combat.

[Scott Anderson]

I actually like this rule a lot because it allows heroes and fantastic monsters to dispatch normals in a timely manner.

[Finarvyn]

Feb 26, 2015 17:14:00 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

Notice also that the last part of the quoted rule implies that 1+1 HD types attack at +1 vs normal types too. I.e., veterans, elves, hobgoblins and the like would add one to their hit probability vs normal types

This is also what makes it cool that elves and dwarves are given 1+1 HD in the monster listing. If you encounter an army of humans a dragon gets multi-attacks since they are "mundane" but against an army of elves this is negated since they are above 1 HD.

[waysoftheearth]

Feb 27, 2015 8:05:15 GMT -6 Scott Anderson said:

I actually like this rule a lot because it allows heroes and fantastic monsters to dispatch normals in a timely manner.

Yep, but remember it cuts both ways

Feb 27, 2015 12:40:10 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

This is also what makes it cool that elves and dwarves are given 1+1 HD in the monster listing. If you encounter an army of humans a dragon gets multi-attacks since they are "mundane" but against an army of elves this is negated since they are above 1 HD.

That sounds like the AD&D rule to me (which, from memory, says multiple attacks per HD apply against figures with fewer than one eight-sided HD).

In OD&D the distinction is between normal and fantastic types, but this boundary is not defined explicitly in terms of HD.

The FAQ article states that the "regular system" (i.e. normal combat) is used for "kobolds, goblins, dwarves, orcs, elves, men, hobgoblins, etc.". Swords & Spells also classing elves, hobgoblins and (2 HD) gnolls together as elite grade troops. Moreover, M&M shows us that 1st and 2nd level fighters have normal (not heroic) fighting capability.

We can figure it out from there...

[cadriel]

The OD&D FAQ very clearly states the scale of HD for "normal" combat:

"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" (emphasis mine).

This is in the text of the combat example, but it puts it plain as day that normal combat ends above 1 hit die, not at 4 hit dice. So 1st level clerics and magic-users trigger normal combat, but 1st level fighting-men don't.

[waysoftheearth]

It's a frequently debated topic in part because (as mentioned above) the definition of a "normal" was relatively straight forward in 1973/74 but became less so as of the FAQ article in 1975.

FWIW the whole sentence from the FAQ is:

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.

One interpretation is:
As the ratio of one Orc vs. the Hero is 1:4 combat is treated as normal (as is any combat where the score of one side is a base 1 hit die or less).

Another interpretation is:
Combat is treated as normal where the score of one side is a base 1 hit die or less.


Neither of these fits neatly with the previous statement (in the same article!) that normal combat should be used for kobolds, goblins, dwarves, orcs, elves, men, hobgoblins, etc., nor with all the other information appearing in the 3LBBs. Seems to me that any attempt to map "normal type" to a specific number of HD is never going to be an exact science (consider horses with 2 or 3 HD, dervishes and berserkers with 1+1 HD, gnolls and cavemen with 2 HD...).

The best guide (for 1973/74-styled OD&D) is, IMHO, whether the creature in question is a rank and file type (that can be handled by other rank and file types), or a fantastic monster (that is best left to a hero-type).

[Stormcrow]

For once I agree with waysoftheearth. The distinction between "normal" and "fantastic" combat is not a simple matter of hit dice, and never was. Even in Chainmail, leader-figures received +1 on their melee dice and yet still performed only in melee combat.

The real distinction between normal and fantastic combat is how many dice you roll against normal men. In Chainmail, Elves are considered "normal" until they are given magical weapons, at which point they gain an extra melee die.

In D&D, the pluses to hit dice do not affect how many dice are rolled. 1+1 HD, therefore, is still in the realm of "normal" combat, albeit a bit more effective. At 2 HD you get two dice against normals, and this is where fantastic combat begins. But even then it's only normal combat if the monster is a man-like creature with armor and weapons; fantastic monsters with 1 hit die are still fantastic.

[tetramorph]

I must admit that, having never played CM, this is like headache lvl confusing to me.

I can see why folks would want to house rule this.

Any suggestions for poor me? A way to house rule this? Keep the spirit but streamline the mechanics?

[Stormcrow]

Is it basically man-like with a base (ignoring bonuses) of one hit die? It's a "normal" combatant. Anything with a base of two or more hit dice that fights it gets as many attack rolls as its base hit dice, with any bonus to the hit dice applied as a bonus to one of the attack rolls.

Waysoftheearth says the monster gets only one die of damage in normal combat. I disagree: I think any extra damage should apply to each successful hit.

[tetramorph]

Okay, starting to wrap my little brain around it. Thanks!

[derv]

Feb 28, 2015 7:58:14 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

I must admit that, having never played CM, this is like headache lvl confusing to me.

I can see why folks would want to house rule this.

Any suggestions for poor me? A way to house rule this? Keep the spirit but streamline the mechanics?

There's a couple ways people can and do approach this.

The simplest house rule is how most interpreted the rule as presented on page 5 of M&T, "....simply a matter of allowing one roll as a man-type for every hit die, with any bonus being given to only one of the attacks". Many would understand "normals" to be those of <1HD (possibly including 1+1HD). So, all higher HD monsters and PC's would gain as many multiple attacks as their HD against such "normals". Some would also say, these multiple attacks would be at 1st level or 1HD on the combat table.

If you'd want, you could further restrict this benefit to only those of "heroic" HD for PC's, or an easier approach would be to say any with 4HD or greater get multiple attacks. This is essentially what a "Hero" was in Chainmail because they had the fighting ability of 4 men.

To further complicate the ruling, you then could use ratios of HD to determine how many attacks the superior PC or monster would get. So, if a 8+2 HD Superhero was fighting a 2HD Caveman, he would get 4 attacks, with one of those attacks at +2, to the Cavemans one attack. This would be putting 2nd level Fighters in the realm of "normals" though and would be a two-way street. If used, it would suggest that 2nd level Fighters do not get multiple attacks and would be subject to such attacks. I personally do not consider any creatures of 2HD or better, "normal".

Ways mentioned above that there are some monsters that don't seem to neatly fit with the 1HD definition of "normal". It could be argued that there is a third category besides "normals" and "fantastics" that are neither. They can not perform multiple attacks nor are they subject to multiple attacks. This might include all 1+1HD up to 2 or 3HD PC's and monsters. The Elf with magic sword in CM and his D&D counter part would be a good example. Something to chew on anyway

[sepulchre]

Derve, enjoying your two quotes by Cowper and Russel, had not heard them before. Question, is there precedent in the RAW for this interpretation of ratios of HD? I know there was a post here that included a well formatted example, but I have been unable to find it since.

[derv]

This conversation could be further obfuscated, if we wanted, by making the comparison to Chainmails MtM combat systems, since OD&D did include Fighting Capabilities on page 17 that were meant to be used with CM combat tables. These clearly show that certain level characters fight as multiple men. But, there are a few anomalies on those tables, not to mention that the Magic-user widely departs from it's Chainmail origins and Clerics did not originally exist in CM.

Considering CM, the real take away would be who is included on Chainmail's Fantasy Combat Table, knowing only "fantastic-types" can use this table. In OD&D, these are all 2HD or better figures (Ghouls would fight as Wights in CM).

[derv]

Feb 28, 2015 11:52:55 GMT -6 sepulchre said:

Derve, enjoying your two quotes by Cowper and Russel, had not heard them before. Question, is there precedent in the RAW for this interpretation of ratios of HD? I know there was a post here that included a well formatted example, but I have been unable to find it since.

I was only elaborating on what Cadriel and Ways had referenced and offering a logical consequence of including creatures of 2HD or greater as "normal". This is not something I use in my games. The reference is from the FAQ in SR#2 and I think Kent may have reformatted it and put it into a pdf here somewhere.

[Stormcrow]

Feb 28, 2015 10:05:49 GMT -6 derv said:

The simplest house rule is how most interpreted the rule as presented on page 5 of M&T, "....simply a matter of allowing one roll as a man-type for every hit die, with any bonus being given to only one of the attacks". Many would understand "normals" to be those of <1HD (possibly including 1+1HD). So, all higher HD monsters and PC's would gain as many multiple attacks as their HD against such "normals". Some would also say, these multiple attacks would be at 1st level or 1HD on the combat table.

The FAQ contradicts that last bit. There, a Hero attacks orcs four times as a 4th level fighter, not a 1st level fighter.

If you'd want, you could further restrict this benefit to only those of "heroic" HD for PC's, or an easier approach would be to say any with 4HD or greater get multiple attacks. This is essentially what a "Hero" was in Chainmail because they had the fighting ability of 4 men.

The only reason Chainmail starts fantastic figures at four men is that a Hero is four men. If there had been, say, a figure that fought as two men, that would be on the charts too. Fantastic combat by man-types is not limited to four levels or more; it's limited to two levels or more.

To further complicate the ruling, you then could use ratios of HD to determine how many attacks the superior PC or monster would get. So, if a 8+2 HD Superhero was fighting a 2HD Caveman, he would get 4 attacks, with one of those attacks at +2, to the Cavemans one attack. This would be putting 2nd level Fighters in the realm of "normals" though and would be a two-way street. If used, it would suggest that 2nd level Fighters do not get multiple attacks and would be subject to such attacks. I personally do not consider any creatures of 2HD or better, "normal".

I also don't think a simple ratio of levels or hit dice was ever intended. 2:8 does not reduce to 1:4. If both monsters are fantastic, use fantastic combat, which always consists of a single attack die.

This conversation could be further obfuscated, if we wanted

Tetramorph was asking for clarification, not obfuscation!

[derv]

Feb 28, 2015 14:07:26 GMT -6 Stormcrow said:

The only reason Chainmail starts fantastic figures at four men is that a Hero is four men. If there had been, say, a figure that fought as two men, that would be on the charts too. Fantastic combat by man-types is not limited to four levels or more; it's limited to two levels or more.

I wasn't making this suggestion based on Chainmail, but on what others consider as "normal". If you include 3HD monsters (Heavy Horse) as "normal", then 4HD is the jumping off spot for "fantastic" or "heroic". It's convenient that Heroes also fight as 4 men and are 4HD. But, in Chainmail the Fantasy Combat Table does include Wights (Ghouls) that melee as a single LH and are 3HD in D&D. Ghouls are only 2HD in D&D.

Since tetramorph was asking for a house rule, I was offering some options. There really isn't a right answer to this question. Chainmail can only inform so much in this regard, then you still need to make a decision for yourself.

[tetramorph]

Nevertheless I'm starting to get it.

Here is a house rule of mine. I'm sure it doesn't fit in, but tell me what y'all think (kindly, please).

When PCs of any lvl higher than 1 combat NPCs of 1 or less HD upon the PC's successful hit I interpret DMG roll to indicate #s killed.

I can imagine, if I ever got really high PCs (say 8+ HD) that I might even start doing that with 2 HD NPCs, etc.

I like throwing whole armies of skeletons, zombies, men at arms, etc., at my PCs. It remains a challenge but combat keeps moving at a good pace.

I also like having these 1 HD wonders attack en masse and grapple down heroes by sheer number. Pretty fun.

[derv]

Feb 28, 2015 14:50:56 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

When PCs of any lvl higher than 1 combat NPCs of 1 or less HD upon the PC's successful hit I interpret DMG roll to indicate #s killed.

Are you saying one attack roll with a successful hit doing 1d6 damage and each point of damage equal to a NPC kill? So, a roll of 5 on a d6 would have killed 5 NPC's?

If this is the case, it seems over powered and does not scale with the level of the PC. Maybe, if you would use variable damage based on the PC's HD. So, a 3HD Swordsman would roll 1d3 to determine number of kills.

[Stormcrow]

Feb 28, 2015 14:43:57 GMT -6 derv said:

what others consider as "normal". If you include 3HD monsters (Heavy Horse) as "normal", then 4HD is the jumping off spot for "fantastic" or "heroic".

But a Heavy Horse doesn't fight as three men; it fights as one Heavy Horse. The normal vs. fantastic dichotomy completely ignores horses. So I do not consider one Heavy Horse to be the equivalent of three normal men; I consider it the equivalent—and equal—of one Heavy Horse. In Chainmail.

Now, D&D isn't Chainmail, and the fighting category of "horse" doesn't exist in D&D. A 3 HD heavy horse against normal men gets three rolls on the monster attack table as a 3 HD monster, and a single roll on the same table as a 3 HD monster against fantastic creatures—which includes other horses. (No, horses aren't fantastic, but anything that is not a "normal man-type" creature counts as "fantastic.")

[Stormcrow]

Feb 28, 2015 14:50:56 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

When PCs of any lvl higher than 1 combat NPCs of 1 or less HD upon the PC's successful hit I interpret DMG roll to indicate #s killed.

Try this instead. Since 1 HD monsters average 3.5 hit points, and since the average hit does 3.5 hit points of damage, assume each successful die roll in normal combat by a fantastic combatant kills the target.

So if a Hero fights a bunch of orcs, he rolls four attack dice. If two of those dice hit, he kills two orcs.

This should, of course, go both ways, and 1st level characters fighting anything with more than one hit die should instantly be killed when hit. This starts to seem a little silly when they reach 2nd level and are suddenly immune to this.

[derv]

Feb 28, 2015 17:03:54 GMT -6 Stormcrow said:

But a Heavy Horse doesn't fight as three men; it fights as one Heavy Horse. The normal vs. fantastic dichotomy completely ignores horses. So I do not consider one Heavy Horse to be the equivalent of three normal men; I consider it the equivalent—and equal—of one Heavy Horse. In Chainmail.

Now, D&D isn't Chainmail, and the fighting category of "horse" doesn't exist in D&D. A 3 HD heavy horse against normal men gets three rolls on the monster attack table as a 3 HD monster, and a single roll on the same table as a 3 HD monster against fantastic creatures—which includes other horses. (No, horses aren't fantastic, but anything that is not a "normal man-type" creature counts as "fantastic.")

There you go, Stormcrow. You hit the nail of one of the arguments on it's head. In Chainmail a Heavy Horse figure is considered "normal". It takes only one hit to kill a HH figure. This is true even though the horse gains it's own attack roll, seperate from it's rider, on the second round of MtM combat. Besides this, they are not to be found on Chainmail's Fantasy Combat Table. Yet, D&D lists Heavy Horses as 3HD. This is greater then the 2+2HD given to Pegasi. Are they really "normal" in D&D, or "fantastic"? If they're fantastic, then they are some mystical beast that do not have any common ancestry with Chainmail. I mean, even you're lowly Draft Horse is some type of steroid driven beast if it gets two attacks against all your 1st level PC's. I havn't touched on D&D's death dealing mules either.

[Stormcrow]

You're not getting it. "Normal" combat is about how many men you fight as. Horses in Chainmail don't fight as men; they fight as horses. They are an element of Chainmail combat that didn't transition to D&D. Treat D&D horses as any other multiple-hit-dice monster: multiple attacks against normal men; one attack only against other monsters.

[derv]

What exactly is it that you think I'm not getting?

What it boils down to is what a person decides constitutes "normal" in their game. This terminology and it's implications are a remnant of Chainmail. If that's 1HD or less, then that's the dividing line between "normals" and non-normals or "fantastics". But, OD&D altered and expanded many things and it can be argued that "normals" might also include those of up to 3HD, such as the Heavy Horse. This is not my position, but it doesn't phase me much if others choose to adopt this view. When it comes to animals like a Mule or a Draft Horse, I'm inclined to agree from a practical point that they are also "normal".

But, more importantly, what does this mean?

Horses in Chainmail don't fight as men; they fight as horses. They are an element of Chainmail combat that didn't transition to D&D.

Page 20 of M&T says, "As explained in CHAINMAIL, war horses melee [period]"

How does this direct reference to Chainmail and Heavy Horses suggest that they didn't transition to D&D?

I think you're starting to tread on shaky ground.

[Stormcrow]

Let me take this from another angle.

Chainmail "horse" refers to a mounted man, not a horse.

The only time in Chainmail that an actual horse fights is in man-to-man combat, where it fights as if it were 1 mace, 2 maces, or 2 flails, for light, medium, or heavy horse respectively (p. 25).

D&D's hit dice for horses of 2, 2+1, and 3 for light, medium, and heavy horse do not correspond to anything in Chainmail.

There is no evidence, therefore, that Chainmail or D&D ever defines fantastic combat as starting at 4 hit dice. The evidence points to starting at 2 HD, which is when a monster first gets extra attacks against normal men or man-type monsters.

[Deleted]

Hey, ya wanna know how Gary REALLY did it?

A 4th level fighter versus orcs... he rolled a d4 to see how many orcs got killed.
A 6th level fighter versus orcs... he rolled a d6 to see how manh orcs got killed.

Et cetera.

And a monster versus ordinary men... he used the monster's hit dice for levels, rolled a die of that number, and that's how many ordinary men got killed.

"Ordinary" was anything with 1 HD or less.

That's also, by the way, why it was suicidal/useless to bring ordinary men at arms into the dungeon past level 1 or maybe 2 at most.

[Stormcrow]

Feb 28, 2015 20:53:01 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

A 4th level fighter versus orcs... he rolled a d4 to see how many orcs got killed.
A 6th level fighter versus orcs... he rolled a d6 to see how manh orcs got killed.

So THAT'S why he complained about 40th level characters!