tom
Level 2 Seer
Posts: 40 
|
Post by tom on Mar 15, 2024 7:10:27 GMT -6
I really wanted to put this to the community in case I am missing something. I'm pretty settled on my conclusion at the moment regarding this...
In OD&D most of us eventually come to the conclusion that when a creature of 2 Hit Dice or higher (whether a player character, non-player character or monster) is fighting a creature of less than 2 Hit Dice they are allowed to make multiple attacks.
OD&D Book II “Monsters & Treasure” tells us that:
“Attack/Defence 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. (Combat is detailed in Vol. III.)”
Strategic Review issue 2 also clarifies things a little further, whilst discussing a combat example between a hero (4th level fighter) and orcs:
“Note that [the hero] 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.”
A “base 1 hit die or less” is a fairly ambiguous piece of text. If it were to say “1 hit die or less” we might consider 1+1 hit die as being over this threshold, however the word “base” prefixing this implies that anything from ½ a hit die (which is the lowest example given) up to 1+1 (the highest example given) is considered a base 1 hit die or less. Although not included in any example through “the three brown books” of OD&D rules; a 1+3,4 or 5 would also be considered as a base 1 hit die or less. So essentially anything under 2 hit dice is considered a base 1 hit die or less, unless I am missing the point entirely!
Please let me know if that is the case or I will take your silence as confirmation that I am right.
The Strategic Review article also explains:
“When fantastic combat is taking place there is normally only one exchange of attacks per round”
So in conclusion multiple attacks are only applicable to combat between a figure with more than 2 Hit Dice versus a figure with less than 2 Hit Dice. In any other case only 1 exchange of attacks is made per round.
As a side note: I have no idea why some people only grant multiple attacks to fighters? If Monsters & Treasure tells us the monsters get one roll for each of their hit die, plus bonuses - and monster lists include all types of men and monsters, which includes the various character classes, why would player characters be restricted?
But the question I have for today is: does the multiple attack rule extend to missile fire? My intuition tells me it does not and so does the logic when you think about it!
In OD&D a combat round lasts 1 minute and a 10th level lord could land 10 blows against an orc in that time. This makes sense, but is it feasible that the lord can pull out a cross bow and fire 10 quarrels in a single minute? That would be 1 shot made every 6 seconds! Considering the crossbow would need reloading this is actually quite ridiculous! In CHAINMAIL the rate of fire for a crossbow is once per turn if a figure stays stationary and this makes perfect sense to me.
What are peoples thoughts on this?
|
|
rayotus
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 122
|
Post by rayotus on Mar 15, 2024 8:18:56 GMT -6
Well, that line in Monsters & Treasures is clearly referencing Chainmail, not the Alternative method of combat. And SR refers to a Hero, right? I need to go back and look at that. Anyway, I don't think it's quite as clear as your conclusions make it. I actually don't use multiple attacks against ≤ 1 HD opponents when playing a kind of purist Oe with the Alt system only. But maybe I will "come around."  In a non-purist game, I allow the fighter (only) to get this benefit, but that's because it adds flavor to the class that is missing and reserving it for the fighter makes it 'special.' |
|
|
|
Post by captainjapan on Mar 15, 2024 13:08:21 GMT -6
Heroes attack as 4 men and can fire missiles equal to the same number of men, vs. regular opponents, but only once vs. fantastic opponents.
-paraphrased from Chainmail, Appendix D, the Fantasy Reference Table and footnote
note: the Troll example in Monsters & Treasure refers the reader to Vol. III, Underworld & Wilderness Adventures. U&WA is where you find the Land Combat rule (pg.25) which refers you to the Chainmail tables for melee resolution. Chainmail 20:1 combat is where attack capability is measured in figures/men/miniatures. Heroes fight as 4 miniature figures.
note 2: Mike Mornard, in conversation with Rob Kuntz, remarked once that while play testing original D&D, he just assumed that a Hero should make 4 attacks, because that's how they played Chainmail. No comment on wizards, though. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Mar 15, 2024 13:18:42 GMT -6
Heroes attack as 4 men and can fire missiles equal to the same number of men, vs. regular opponents, but only once vs. fantastic opponents. -paraphrased from Chainmail, Appendix D, the Fantasy Reference Table and footnote note: the Troll example in Monsters & Treasure refers the reader to Vol. III, Underworld & Wilderness Adventures. U&WA is where you find the Land Combat rule (pg.25) which refers you to the Chainmail tables for melee resolution. Chainmail 20:1 combat is where attack capability is measured in figures/men/miniatures. Heroes fight as 4 miniature figures. note 2: Mike Mornard, in conversation with Rob Kuntz, remarked once that while play testing original D&D, he just assumed that a Hero should make 4 attacks, because that's how they played Chainmail. No comment on wizards, though. Sorry. Well, if we are to extrapolate from that, a Magic User has the fighting capability of a Hero-1 at 7th level (Enchanter) according to Men and Magic page 17. Thus, a 7th-level Magic User should be able to attack 4 times, with one of those attacks being at a -1 penalty, based on the above reading. Clerics, then, by extension, hit Hero-1 at 6th level (Bishop) This is actually fascinating. I normally use CHainmail combat when playing OD&D, but applying these concepts to the alternate combat system would actually make for a pretty dynamic game. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 15, 2024 15:27:42 GMT -6
I've thought about multiple attacks applied to the Alternate Combat system, or just one attack with multiple dice of damage. So, for example, if a character has a FC of 3+1 rather than give him three attacks give him a single attack with 3d6+1 damage. In an all-d6 damage game that would seem to scale well, plus keep combat moving quickly.
|
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Mar 15, 2024 20:05:58 GMT -6
A few comments for your consideration, inline in blue below: I really wanted to put this to the community in case I am missing something. I'm pretty settled on my conclusion at the moment regarding this... In OD&D most of us eventually come to the conclusion that when a creature of 2 Hit Dice or higher (whether a player character, non-player character or monster) is fighting a creature of less than 2 Hit Dice they are allowed to make multiple attacks. This depends on "when".
Yes, in 1975 the FAQ article mentions the 1 HD line in the sand. Earlier, the distinction is between normal and heroic/fantastic types without reference to HD.OD&D Book II “Monsters & Treasure” tells us that: “Attack/Defence 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. (Combat is detailed in Vol. III.)” Strategic Review issue 2 also clarifies things a little further, whilst discussing a combat example between a hero (4th level fighter) and orcs: “Note that [the hero] 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.” A “base 1 hit die or less” is a fairly ambiguous piece of text. If it were to say “1 hit die or less” we might consider 1+1 hit die as being over this threshold, however the word “base” prefixing this implies that anything from ½ a hit die (which is the lowest example given) up to 1+1 (the highest example given) is considered a base 1 hit die or less. Although not included in any example through “the three brown books” of OD&D rules; a 1+3,4 or 5 would also be considered as a base 1 hit die or less. So essentially anything under 2 hit dice is considered a base 1 hit die or less, unless I am missing the point entirely! See above note re "when".
Consider also that horses fight in normal (non-fantastic) M2M combat in CM, where they (typically) get two attacks against men. Over in D&D-land, horses have 2 HD but they are still normal. Likewise, D&D-Cavemen have 2 HD and are described in terms that imply the M2M matrix. 2 HD gnolls (along with 1+1 HD elves, hobgoblins, and veterans) were considered elite guard troops in S&S (1976).
Worthwhile noting that the FAQ article is full of "inconsistencies" with the 3LBBs, some of which might be considered "progress"? E.g., see here.Please let me know if that is the case or I will take your silence as confirmation that I am right. The Strategic Review article also explains: “When fantastic combat is taking place there is normally only one exchange of attacks per round” So in conclusion multiple attacks are only applicable to combat between a figure with more than 2 Hit Dice versus a figure with less than 2 Hit Dice. In any other case only 1 exchange of attacks is made per round. If we are talking about 1974 3LBBs, then any figure has one attack as a man for each of its HD, against any normal type regardless of its HD (sure, the majority of normal types are 1 HD, but this is incidental rather than a BTB requirement).
If we are talking about 1975 OD&D+FAQ, then we have moved on. In the FAQ example (contrary to M&T) the hero has four attacks as a hero against 1 HD orcs, and it is arguable (because of the 1 HD line in the sand) that the hero would now only attack a caveman or horse once (as a hero). Silly as that may seem.As a side note: I have no idea why some people only grant multiple attacks to fighters? If Monsters & Treasure tells us the monsters get one roll for each of their hit die, plus bonuses - and monster lists include all types of men and monsters, which includes the various character classes, why would player characters be restricted? Yes. Per 3LBB OD&D, any figure with multiple HD gets multiple attacks as a man versus normal types.
This is also explicit in the FC stat of PC types who attack as multiple men as they advance in levels. Unfortunately, between the draft and the published versions, the alignment between HD and FC was borked (esp for clerics).
But the question I have for today is: does the multiple attack rule extend to missile fire? My intuition tells me it does not and so does the logic when you think about it! In OD&D a combat round lasts 1 minute and a 10th level lord could land 10 blows against an orc in that time. This makes sense, but is it feasible that the lord can pull out a cross bow and fire 10 quarrels in a single minute? That would be 1 shot made every 6 seconds! Considering the crossbow would need reloading this is actually quite ridiculous! In CHAINMAIL the rate of fire for a crossbow is once per turn if a figure stays stationary and this makes perfect sense to me. What are peoples thoughts on this? The length of an OD&D melee round is discussed at great length elsewhere on these boards; prolly best to follow this up in any of those rather than derail this topic.
However, IMHO, UWA p8 implies "there are up to 10 rounds of combat per one minute combat turn". There is plenty of evidence for this, including the recently revealed GD&D draft which has an alternate/prior rendering of UWA's discussion of moves/turns. This can go a long way toward resolving rate of fire problems. |
|
tom
Level 2 Seer
Posts: 40
|
Post by tom on Mar 16, 2024 4:56:30 GMT -6
A few comments for your consideration, inline in blue below: I really wanted to put this to the community in case I am missing something. I'm pretty settled on my conclusion at the moment regarding this... In OD&D most of us eventually come to the conclusion that when a creature of 2 Hit Dice or higher (whether a player character, non-player character or monster) is fighting a creature of less than 2 Hit Dice they are allowed to make multiple attacks. This depends on "when".
Yes, in 1975 the FAQ article mentions the 1 HD line in the sand. Earlier, the distinction is between normal and heroic/fantastic types without reference to HD.
The distinction seems essentially the same to me. In the FAQ Gary uses the term "Base 1 Hit Die or less", meaning (as per the range of HD given across all figures mentioned in the OD&D books) anything from 1/2 a HD to 1+1 HD and these are defined as "normal types", anything from 2 HD and up are as I always thought considered "fantastic types" and "super-normal" types, which is another term Gary used are figures who can advance in level i.e. player characters. The only exception to this rule is normal animals such as horses, mules etc.OD&D Book II “Monsters & Treasure” tells us that: “Attack/Defence 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. (Combat is detailed in Vol. III.)” Strategic Review issue 2 also clarifies things a little further, whilst discussing a combat example between a hero (4th level fighter) and orcs: “Note that [the hero] 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.” A “base 1 hit die or less” is a fairly ambiguous piece of text. If it were to say “1 hit die or less” we might consider 1+1 hit die as being over this threshold, however the word “base” prefixing this implies that anything from ½ a hit die (which is the lowest example given) up to 1+1 (the highest example given) is considered a base 1 hit die or less. Although not included in any example through “the three brown books” of OD&D rules; a 1+3,4 or 5 would also be considered as a base 1 hit die or less. So essentially anything under 2 hit dice is considered a base 1 hit die or less, unless I am missing the point entirely! See above note re "when".
Consider also that horses fight in normal (non-fantastic) M2M combat in CM, where they (typically) get two attacks against men. Over in D&D-land, horses have 2 HD but they are still normal. Likewise, D&D-Cavemen have 2 HD and are described in terms that imply the M2M matrix. 2 HD gnolls (along with 1+1 HD elves, hobgoblins, and veterans) were considered elite guard troops in S&S (1976).
Worthwhile noting that the FAQ article is full of "inconsistencies" with the 3LBBs, some of which might be considered "progress"? E.g., see here.
Points noted - I've covered animals above as being an exception but I'm still yet to look into cavemen. I guess S&S came along as a replacement to the CHAINMAIL mass combat system so this is were the game really starts to transition more fiercely into "the land of ambiguity" as I progress with my own games I'm sure to come up against some of these points and will look into them further to see if they can or cannot be reconciled.Please let me know if that is the case or I will take your silence as confirmation that I am right. The Strategic Review article also explains: “When fantastic combat is taking place there is normally only one exchange of attacks per round” So in conclusion multiple attacks are only applicable to combat between a figure with more than 2 Hit Dice versus a figure with less than 2 Hit Dice. In any other case only 1 exchange of attacks is made per round. If we are talking about 1974 3LBBs, then any figure has one attack as a man for each of its HD, against any normal type regardless of its HD (sure, the majority of normal types are 1 HD, but this is incidental rather than a BTB requirement).
If we are talking about 1975 OD&D+FAQ, then we have moved on. In the FAQ example (contrary to M&T) the hero has four attacks as a hero against 1 HD orcs, and it is arguable (because of the 1 HD line in the sand) that the hero would now only attack a caveman or horse once (as a hero). Silly as that may seem.This does seem rather silly and very interesting too! I will have a look into this so thanks for pointing this out.As a side note: I have no idea why some people only grant multiple attacks to fighters? If Monsters & Treasure tells us the monsters get one roll for each of their hit die, plus bonuses - and monster lists include all types of men and monsters, which includes the various character classes, why would player characters be restricted? Yes. Per 3LBB OD&D, any figure with multiple HD gets multiple attacks as a man versus normal types.
This is also explicit in the FC stat of PC types who attack as multiple men as they advance in levels. Unfortunately, between the draft and the published versions, the alignment between HD and FC was borked (esp for clerics).But the question I have for today is: does the multiple attack rule extend to missile fire? My intuition tells me it does not and so does the logic when you think about it! In OD&D a combat round lasts 1 minute and a 10th level lord could land 10 blows against an orc in that time. This makes sense, but is it feasible that the lord can pull out a cross bow and fire 10 quarrels in a single minute? That would be 1 shot made every 6 seconds! Considering the crossbow would need reloading this is actually quite ridiculous! In CHAINMAIL the rate of fire for a crossbow is once per turn if a figure stays stationary and this makes perfect sense to me. What are peoples thoughts on this? The length of an OD&D melee round is discussed at great length elsewhere on these boards; prolly best to follow this up in any of those rather than derail this topic.
However, IMHO, UWA p8 implies "there are up to 10 rounds of combat per one minute combat turn". There is plenty of evidence for this, including the recently revealed GD&D draft which has an alternate/prior rendering of UWA's discussion of moves/turns. This can go a long way toward resolving rate of fire problems.It seems ludicrous to me that a superhero would be able to fire an arrow every 1.25 seconds let alone every 7.5! Further comments by me in red |
|
tom
Level 2 Seer
Posts: 40
|
Post by tom on Mar 16, 2024 6:04:03 GMT -6
Heroes attack as 4 men and can fire missiles equal to the same number of men, vs. regular opponents, but only once vs. fantastic opponents. -paraphrased from Chainmail, Appendix D, the Fantasy Reference Table and footnote note: the Troll example in Monsters & Treasure refers the reader to Vol. III, Underworld & Wilderness Adventures. U&WA is where you find the Land Combat rule (pg.25) which refers you to the Chainmail tables for melee resolution. Chainmail 20:1 combat is where attack capability is measured in figures/men/miniatures. Heroes fight as 4 miniature figures. note 2: Mike Mornard, in conversation with Rob Kuntz, remarked once that while play testing original D&D, he just assumed that a Hero should make 4 attacks, because that's how they played Chainmail. No comment on wizards, though. Sorry. This is all I can find regarding multiple missile attacks as well after looking into it further. It seems it only applies to heroes and superheroes though as there are other examples in the fantasy combat table of creatures with more than 2 hit dice that dont get this ability. I think ive concluded (atleast for now) that a hero (4th level fighter) gets 4 missile attacks against normal types and a superhero gets 8 but no other type of creature gets this ability its just the fighters. |
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Mar 17, 2024 23:19:45 GMT -6
The length of an OD&D melee round is discussed at great length elsewhere on these boards; prolly best to follow this up in any of those rather than derail this topic.
However, IMHO, UWA p8 implies "there are up to 10 rounds of combat per one minute combat turn". There is plenty of evidence for this, including the recently revealed GD&D draft which has an alternate/prior rendering of UWA's discussion of moves/turns. This can go a long way toward resolving rate of fire problems. UWA p8: That's what my editions say; no mention of a "one minute combat turn". I don't see any implication for 10 rounds in one minute - am I missing something?
To me, this section is pretty clear that there are 10 rounds in 10 minutes, which implies 1-minute combat rounds, but the actual time might differ.
Regarding multiple missile attacks: Since it's a fantasy game, we explained high numbers as firing multiple missiles at once. One of our DMs ruled that fighters could specialize and either get multiple melee attacks or ranged attacks (Rangers); elves and hobbits would always get multiple missile attacks.
|
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Mar 18, 2024 3:32:46 GMT -6
Apologies for derailing the topic  That's what my editions say; no mention of a "one minute combat turn". I don't see any implication for 10 rounds in one minute - am I missing something? Only that the first two phrases quoted are discussing 10-minute dungeon exploration turns, while the third phrase quoted is discussing combat turns. Comparing the GD&D draft of this section makes it clearer: So it's talking about the move/turn for both dungeon and wilderness exploration together, with the turn being EITHER 10 minutes in the underworld, OR 1 day in the wilderness. These were separated out in the published version. In the draft THE MOVE/TURN is followed by resting, then searching/loading treasures/ESPing, then locating secret doors/passages, then listening, then light, then earning experience points, then "seeing" monsters underground, etc. and nothing is mentioned about combat for three more pages. In the published version, the MOVE/TURN IN THE UNDERWORLD is followed by resting, then searching/loading treasures/ESPing (per the draft), and then that one line on combat appears in the space at the bottom of page 8, before continuing on with secret pages, (then doors, traps), then listening, then light, just like in the draft. Seems clear (to me) from this that the one line re combat in published version was crammed in between searching/ESP'ing/loading treasure, and locating secret doors because it fit. Not because combat turns had any relation to dungeon exploration turns. But even without the GD&D draft, we only have to think about how combat would work in the wilderness exploration game. When combat occurs in the wilderness, does "ten rounds of combat per turn" refer to the 1-day exploration turn? If not, why should "ten rounds of combat per turn" refer to the 10-minute exploration turn during dungeon exploration? And what role does a 10-minute dungeon exploration turn have in the wilderness game? The only way that line works in both contexts is if "turn" refers to a combat turn. All that humbug aside, Gygax is explicit in the 1980 1st print of B2 how it works: So that's it. Gygax goes on: But that was for Holmes, you cry. Sure. Which is as near as to an official revision of OD&D, edited by Gygax, as we're going to get. Anyways, it works for me. YMMV. |
|
tom
Level 2 Seer
Posts: 40
|
Post by tom on Mar 18, 2024 10:43:43 GMT -6
Apologies for derailing the topic That's what my editions say; no mention of a "one minute combat turn". I don't see any implication for 10 rounds in one minute - am I missing something? Only that the first two phrases quoted are discussing 10-minute dungeon exploration turns, while the third phrase quoted is discussing combat turns. Comparing the GD&D draft of this section makes it clearer: So it's talking about the move/turn for both dungeon and wilderness exploration together, with the turn being EITHER 10 minutes in the underworld, OR 1 day in the wilderness. These were separated out in the published version. In the draft THE MOVE/TURN is followed by resting, then searching/loading treasures/ESPing, then locating secret doors/passages, then listening, then light, then earning experience points, then "seeing" monsters underground, etc. and nothing is mentioned about combat for three more pages. In the published version, the MOVE/TURN IN THE UNDERWORLD is followed by resting, then searching/loading treasures/ESPing (per the draft), and then that one line on combat appears in the space at the bottom of page 8, before continuing on with secret pages, (then doors, traps), then listening, then light, just like in the draft. Seems clear (to me) from this that the one line re combat in published version was crammed in between searching/ESP'ing/loading treasure, and locating secret doors because it fit. Not because combat turns had any relation to dungeon exploration turns. But even without the GD&D draft, we only have to think about how combat would work in the wilderness exploration game. When combat occurs in the wilderness, does "ten rounds of combat per turn" refer to the 1-day exploration turn? If not, why should "ten rounds of combat per turn" refer to the 10-minute exploration turn during dungeon exploration? And what role does a 10-minute dungeon exploration turn have in the wilderness game? The only way that line works in both contexts is if "turn" refers to a combat turn. All that humbug aside, Gygax is explicit in the 1980 1st print of B2 how it works: So that's it. Gygax goes on: But that was for Holmes, you cry. Sure. Which is as near as to an official revision of OD&D, edited by Gygax, as we're going to get. Anyways, it works for me. YMMV. I have several issues with this which we have discussed before over email, so you're already aware of my opinion so won't really go into detail. I do think there is strong enough arguments for both outcomes and its a matter of interpretation, but one thing I will add is you also have to take the supplement eldritch wizardry into consideration. Gary introduced the idea of segmental combat. If you divide a 10 second combat round into 6 segments, then each segment is 1.66 recurring seconds in length. A bit bizarre really. A 1 minute round would segment into 6 neat 10 second segments though. Just some food for thought... |
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Mar 18, 2024 15:38:40 GMT -6
EW's segmented melee round is an addition over and above the pre-existing turns/rounds structure.
Segments don't replace rounds. They are for determining when, within a round, actions should fall. If it's not enough to simply know who goes first in a round, but you want to know, frex, "how far has the target run before my ranger shoots" then you could use segments to figure it out.
EW's per segment movement rates (p6-7) show that a figure with a 12" move covers 4ft of ground in each of 6 segments = 24ft in a full round. That's about 8 strides.
To me this also implies short, rather than minute-long, rounds.
|
|
|
|
Post by angantyr on Mar 18, 2024 22:31:30 GMT -6
"It seems ludicrous to me that a superhero would be able to fire an arrow every 1.25 seconds let alone every 7.5!"
Not to drag realism into this, but I fail to see why this is so incredible to you - English longbowmen could loose around a dozen shots a minute, give or take (so, ~5 seconds per shot). As for crossbows, it rather depends: are we talking about a (relatively) light weapon drawn by putting one's foot into a stirrup and standing up, a stouter weapon requiring a goat's foot lever to cock, or a full up arbalest that needs a windlass or a cranequin to wind back? The former perhaps around 10 seconds or so, a goat's foot lever or similar 15-20 seconds depending on skill, while full up mechanical help (needed for a prod with a draw weight of several hundred to a thousand pounds or more) is probably going to take a minute to wind up. Of course, you get a lot more punching power from the more powerful weapons, but it's why crossbowman with such powerful arms had to shelter behind a pavise whilst reloading.
Just say'n...
The real problem with high rate of shot, though, is the rather rapid loss of ammunition - the aforementioned Superhero may only get three turns of loosing arrows before being bereft of said arrows.
|
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Mar 18, 2024 23:54:54 GMT -6
Apologies for derailing the topic Maybe cut the discussion here and merge it with the other thread? Comparing the GD&D draft of this section makes it clearer: So it's talking about the move/turn for both dungeon and wilderness exploration together, with the turn being EITHER 10 minutes in the underworld, OR 1 day in the wilderness. These were separated out in the published version. In the draft THE MOVE/TURN is followed by resting, then searching/loading treasures/ESPing, then locating secret doors/passages, then listening, then light, then earning experience points, then "seeing" monsters underground, etc. and nothing is mentioned about combat for three more pages. In the published version, the MOVE/TURN IN THE UNDERWORLD is followed by resting, then searching/loading treasures/ESPing (per the draft), and then that one line on combat appears in the space at the bottom of page 8, before continuing on with secret pages, (then doors, traps), then listening, then light, just like in the draft. Seems clear (to me) from this that the one line re combat in published version was crammed in between searching/ESP'ing/loading treasure, and locating secret doors because it fit. Not because combat turns had any relation to dungeon exploration turns. But even without the GD&D draft, we only have to think about how combat would work in the wilderness exploration game. When combat occurs in the wilderness, does "ten rounds of combat per turn" refer to the 1-day exploration turn? If not, why should "ten rounds of combat per turn" refer to the 10-minute exploration turn during dungeon exploration? And what role does a 10-minute dungeon exploration turn have in the wilderness game? The only way that line works in both contexts is if "turn" refers to a combat turn. Well, that's really different. Written/organized like this I probably would not have read it like I did. All that humbug aside, Gygax is explicit in the 1980 1st print of B2 how it works: So that's it. 10 rounds per 10 seconds? 100 seconds are 1 melee turn? I'm reading it wrong, am I not? That's pretty much how we played our RAW 0D&D, it's easier to just use one 10-minute turn for melee and include looting the dead, tending to wounds etc. into this turn, and then carry on.[/quote] |
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Mar 19, 2024 1:13:02 GMT -6
|
|
In a non-purist game, I allow the fighter (only) to get this benefit, but that's because it adds flavor to the class that is missing and reserving it for the fighter makes it 'special.'
