MtM combat in chainmail?

[jacar]

So, it occurs to me that MtM combat in chainmail could be accomplished in the same fashion by simply using the alternate combat system in the OD&D game. Simply use the armor class to hit roll as your chance to hit and then each hit causes 1 wound. That is how the MtM rules work anyway. It seems that most folks use 1 level as onewound. Most men will die in 1 hit. Great men will take 2 or more hits to kill.

You could borrow some ideas from MtM about weapon length and the movement rules to make the game more tactical but the core mechanics of OD&D should work fine without any conversion.

Just a thought.

John

[cooper]

Absolutely.

0d&d is "basic" chainmail MtM with a d20 attack roll. Ad&d is literally a full retelling of the MtM combat section. Gygax even includes daggers getting multiple attacks vs. a pike in the Ad&d combat section rules simply replacing "weapon speed" for "weapon classes" and introducing segments.--the only thing lacking in chainmail which solved the problem of using weapon class to determine order of attack, movement in time as related to melee, and assisted in remodeling the spell failure chart. Jeff Perren probably deserves much more credit for the rules of D&D than most people think. Chainmail is the rosetta stone by which all iterations of D&D are explained. If you have a question about combat in Holmes, or Ad&d, chances are the rule you have questions about is derivitive (sometimes mangled) from this game.

Variable weapon damage was the incorporation of the Fantasy MtM chart with the Normal MtM chart. A 4th level hero with a 2 handed sword+3 and an 18/76 strength does 3d6+6 dmg. This extra damage is of course wasted on 0-level soldiers who will die in 1 hit from our fighter whether with a dagger or a sweihander, it is only heroic enemies and fantasy monsters that are effected by variable weapon damage (most especially vs. large foes which is most of the big name fantasy monsters and the weapon with the highest damage vs. Large are the exclusive use of fighting-men heroes.)

So, just like in Chainmail, a hero in dungeons and dragons gets 4 attacks on the Normal MtM table and 1 (big) attack on the Fantasy MtM table.

However, Using 0d&d without the greyhawk variable weapon damage as your MtM system for chainmail means the Fantasy MtM table is not taken into account, again, most critical the, "vs. large" designation. The Wizard lost none of his power with a fireball in the transition from chainmail to D&D. It is my belief that exceptional strength, variable weapon dmg, d10 hit points, and even weapon specializtion were the means by which Gygax restored the power of the hero vs. the relative strength of ogres, trolls, and dragons, and yes, wizards. It took until the Unearthed Arcana, but it finally happened that the fantasy MtM table was fully restored and balanced.



The only changes I would make in designation is that for wizards:

5th level: hero seer
11th level: super-hero wizard

these are the levels they get 3rd level spells (fireball/lightning bolt with 3/2/1) and 6th level spells respectively and explains why wizards and fighters reach "name level" at different times.

The real benefit of using 0d&d+suppliments for your MtM section is of course the Monster's Manual. Simply take the HD of the monster and that's how many "foot" 20:1 scale are treated in mass combat.

[sepulchre]

Cooper wrote:

Variable weapon damage was the incorporation of the Fantasy MtM chart with the Normal MtM chart.

I realize the two are conceptual antecedents of variable weapon damage but from what mathematical basis did you arrive at this?

the weapon with the highest damage vs. Large are the exclusive use of fighting-men heroes.)

I was not aware of this, in AD&D, anyone may score weaon damage vs. a large creature . Why do you think this ruling changed to included all classes?

It took until the Unearthed Arcana, but it finally happened that the fantasy MtM table was fully restored and balanced.

Provactive statement, not really sure I follow you here...

[cooper]

First a point of reference (quoting myself):

"...The hero and the wizard in chainmail were balanced, it is only the flaws in the early iterations of d&d that created what we consider to be "intended design" of power disparities at different levels."

Oct 29, 2010 23:45:46 GMT -6 sepulchre said:

sepulchre wrote
I realize the two are conceptual antecedents of variable weapon damage but from what mathematical basis did you arrive at this?

Sorry if I was unclear. Not mathematically, but intuitive. A hero fighting a troll on the MtM table attacks 4 times each time able to score 1 hit. A troll requires 6 hits to kill. On the Fantasy MtM table a hero gets 1 hit and kills a troll in 1 hit (possibly).

In 0d&d a hero (4th level fighter) fights a troll--as if he's fighting on the FCT but only gets 1d6 damage, yet a 4th level magic-user (certainly 5th level) can kill an ogre with one spell...just like on the FCT. I believe--intuitively, that the adjustments made to weapons and the "buffing" of the fighter class over the course of d&d was to rectify this gross (accidental) weakening of the hero in his transition from chainmail to D&D.

I was not aware of this, in AD&D, anyone may score weaon damage vs. a large creature . Why do you think this ruling changed to included all classes?

What I mean to say was that the weapons that had the best damage vs. large foes were limited to fighters only (two handed swords, long swords, battle axes, spears, lances). A two handed sword does 3d6 dmg vs a troll in Ad&d and a mere respectable 1d10 vs. normal men. The long sword does 1d12 damage, in comparison the clerics best weapon does 1d6 damage vs. large creatures!

It took until the Unearthed Arcana, but it finally happened that the fantasy MtM table was fully restored and balanced
.....Provactive statement, not really sure I follow you here...

In chainmail, the hero and the wizard are balanced (both in the fantasy combat table and in the man to man table, where, yes, a magic-user can put to sleep 20 normal men or 1 ogre, but a hero can attack 4x per round). In early d&d however, the wizard lost literally, none of his puissance, his fireball still incinerates hundreds of foes, his sleep spell still puts out an ogre or 2d6 men, but the fighter is now only limited to 1d6 damage per round! Down from 4d6! But, take a 4th level fighter with 18/76 strength+ superior weapon damage vs. large foes, fighting a troll and now he is back to doing 3d6+3 damage = 4d6 dmg per round vs. heroic enemies and his 4 attacks per round vs. 0-level men at arms.

[aldarron]

Oct 30, 2010 0:04:54 GMT -6 cooper said:

In chainmail, the hero and the wizard are balanced (both in the fantasy combat table and in the man to man table, where, yes, a magic-user can put to sleep 20 normal men or 1 ogre, but a hero can attack 4x per round). In early d&d however, the wizard lost literally, none of his puissance, his fireball still incinerates hundreds of foes, his sleep spell still puts out an ogre or 2d6 men, but the fighter is now only limited to 1d6 damage per round! Down from 4d6! But, take a 4th level fighter with 18/76 strength+ superior weapon damage vs. large foes, fighting a troll and now he is back to doing 3d6+3 damage = 4d6 dmg per round vs. heroic enemies and his 4 attacks per round vs. 0-level men at arms.

Its true that there is that little note on the "alternate" combat table "All attacks which score hits do 1-6 points damage unless otherwise noted." However, people have wondered how strickly this was played back in the day. Without that note, I think the assumption would be that the numbers listed in "Fighting Capability" would represent damage dice ala CHAINMAIL. People have played it that way and there's a few posts floating around in the Men and Magic heading along those lines. Such might give the "balance" you seek.

[sepulchre]

Cooper wrote:

A hero fighting a troll on the MtM table attacks 4 times each time able to score 1 hit. A troll requires 6 hits to kill. On the Fantasy MtM table a hero gets 1 hit and kills a troll in 1 hit (possibly). In 0d&d a hero (4th level fighter) fights a troll--as if he's fighting on the FCT but only gets 1d6 damage, yet a 4th level magic-user (certainly 5th level) can kill an ogre with one spell...just like on the FCT.

...Arriving at this conclusion intuitively, got it, very interesting, thanks!

the weapons that had the best damage vs. large foes were limited to fighters only (two handed swords, long swords, battle axes, spears, lances). A two handed sword does 3d6 dmg vs a troll in Ad&d and a mere respectable 1d10 vs. normal men. The long sword does 1d12 damage, in comparison the clerics best weapon does 1d6 damage vs. large creatures!

I understand, again, very interesting.

In chainmail, the hero and the wizard are balanced (both in the fantasy combat table and in the man to man table, where, yes, a magic-user can put to sleep 20 normal men or 1 ogre, but a hero can attack 4x per round). In early d&d however, the wizard lost literally, none of his puissance, his fireball still incinerates hundreds of foes, his sleep spell still puts out an ogre or 2d6 men, but the fighter is now only limited to 1d6 damage per round! Down from 4d6! But, take a 4th level fighter with 18/76 strength+ superior weapon damage vs. large foes, fighting a troll and now he is back to doing 3d6+3 damage = 4d6 dmg per round vs. heroic enemies and his 4 attacks per round vs. 0-level men at arms.

I had not connected the damage vs. large creatures with Chainmail until now. Thanks! I find all this really fascinating.

Aldarron wrote:

Its true that there is that little note on the "alternate" combat table "All attacks which score hits do 1-6 points damage unless otherwise noted." However, people have wondered how strickly this was played back in the day. Without that note, I think the assumption would be that the numbers listed in "Fighting Capability" would represent damage dice ala CHAINMAIL.

Thanks, Aldarron.