Multiple Attacks

[murquhart72]

The ol' FAQ indicates that, via Chainmail, Fighting-Men and monsters get an attack for every Hit Die when fighting men or man-type creatures (i.e. 1HD or less).
I've taken this a tad further (I think) and expanded that bonus to Magic-Users and Clerics... to an extent: Mediums and Seers attack once per round, Conjurers and Theurgists can swing twice a round, etc.; Adept? Once per round. Village Priest? Twice. Curate? Three times a round.
I get my numbers from the Statistics Regarding Classes chart, under Fighting Capability. I may even allow an addition/subtraction to the last attack as given. Maybe a Magician could attack three kobolds in one round, with a +1 to that last swing?
What do y'all think?

[kenmeister]

I really, really like it, especially because if I use the "alternate" attack charts, then I'll still have use for the original charts.

[aldarron]

Definetly interesting. I think Fin was getting at something like this with this post odd74.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=menmagic&action=display&thread=1023

[Deleted]

this ones awesome i absolutely like it!

[piper]

Fighters get so few advantages as they progress, I would personally hate to take away the one of the few they do get. Or, in this case, dilute it by giving that same advantage to other classes. Thus, I would not use this idea.

I do think your ruling is otherwise workable and a reasonable tweak to the game.

[Finarvyn]

My current mode of thought is more along Snorri's chart (reposted below so you don't need to hunt for it). Rather than give multiple attacks, which slows down combat, give 'em multiple damage to represent the effects of those multiple attacks. Fighters gain damage faster than other classes, and so they still have a nice combat edge.

Where I differ from Snorri's charts is the point where he places a "cap" on fighting capability at 6d6. I think that the dice should reflect the total HD of the fighter, e.g. an 8th level Superhero would get 8d6 damage against 1HD or less creatures.

What is not entirely clear to me from Snorri's charts, however, is what happens if a low-level character attacks something greater than 1 HD. For example, a 2nd level fighter (Warrior) gets 2d6+1 against 1 HD creatures but since he's not at Hero-1 yet can't do damage against Dwarves (1+1 HD). My knee-jerk thought was to give him 1d6 as per usual damage, but at 3rd level he would get 1d6-1. I know that the Fantastic column in Snorri's charts was designed to simulate the table in Chainmail, which is fine for Giants and Balrogs and similar nasties, but it does seem to leave a large "grey area" for creatures greater than 1 HD but not quite Fantastic.

Anyway, I've expanded my charts somewhat here in my "half level" thread, if you'd like to see my version at the moment (still a work in progress).

Snorri's tables:

[snorri]

True. There's too ways to solve it as well:
1/ Against a "normal" dwarf, use normal dmaages. Normal.
2/ Against a 'fantasy' dwarf, use fantasy damages. Awesome: imagine the face of your players when you explain them it's a fantasy dwarf and they can't damage him.

[cooper]

My understanding is that humanoids of 1-3 hits in chainmail do not receive multiple dice of damage. A bugbear or a warrior both would require 2 cumulative hits to remove a unit and do 1d6 dmg.

Only a hero gets simultaneous hits and only monsterous creatures of 4+ capable of fighting on the FCT and hero units get multiple dice. Otherwise the difference between a hero and a 3rd level armored foot is negligible! Who cares about Aragorn the 4th level hero if you have 3 units of sword-masters?

A super-hero-1 (champion) takes 7 simultaneous hits and does 8d6 dmg.
a hero+1 (swashbuckler) takes 5 simultaneous hits and does 4d6 dmg.

I think the confusion began when in d&d they just said you get 1 attack per round per level, which doesn't quite work in CHAINMAIL.

goblins: heavy foot 1 hit, 1d6 dmg
bugbears: heavy foot 2 hits, 1d6 dmg

Following the attack progression in D&D clerics would be heroes at 5th level and super-heroes at 9th. Magic-users move to a new thac0 on the attack matrix at level 6. At this level I would give mu 2d6 dmg (2 attacks) which matches perfectly with wizards in CHAINMAIL.

It is no accident that the attack matrix is 1-3 and then at 4th level the fighting-man improves. This is analogous to getting 4d6 dmg in CHAINMAIL and 1-3rd level fighters all get 1d6 dmg. This is also why a "smoothed attack progression" is anti-historical and belies an ignorance of the attack matrices atavism.


Lets look at an armored hero unit vs. 1 unit of veteran fighting-men

Hero
att/def: AF
hits: 4s
dmg: 4d6/6

vs.
1 unit of Veteran fighting-men
att/def: AF
hits: 1c
dmg: 1d6/6

The hero has about 60% to land at least 1 hit. The Veterans have a 16% chance.

Lets look at d&d
hero
AC: 2
thac0: 17
dmg: 1d6

vs.
Veteran
AC: 2
dmg 1d6

Hero has a 35% chance of landing a hit the veteran has 15%. Assuming a player character a.k.a "hero" would have strength bonus (perhaps using greyhawk suppliment extraordinary str) while a generic fighter would not the hero in d&d probably ends up with roughly the same hit % as the CHAINMAIL hero. Assuming 18/56 str the hero goes to a respectable 50% hit.

a 3rd level fighter fares no better, because his attack matrix is no different from the 1st level fighter so is still stuck at 15% hit rate. The only difference is that the hero needs 3 "hits" to remove him from battle. If gygax had assumed that 3 fighters in chainmail got 3d6 dmg, then the attack matrix for fighters would look like the monster matrix. It does not. It's 1-3rd level and then 4th level (hero) and then 7th level (super-hero-1).

[aldarron]

Apr 10, 2010 17:56:05 GMT -6 murquhart72 said:

I get my numbers from the Statistics Regarding Classes chart, under Fighting Capability. I may even allow an addition/subtraction to the last attack as given. Maybe a Magician could attack three kobolds in one round, with a +1 to that last swing?
What do y'all think?

Interestingly that seems to align wiht this quote in the playtest draft material "Fighting Capabilities: The numbers... indicate the player's ability to handle more than one opponent in combat on an equal basis. For example, a Veteran could take on any ordinary non-veteran man and have a +1 advantage "

Hard to say though whether it meant multple attacks or just that you could face x number of men at once without penalty, (although no penalty for facing multiple attackers is ever specified to my knowledge).